Just down the road from me....
-
Christian Graus wrote:
The government at one point stupidly decided to CREATE a suburb of long term unemployed people. So, in the absence of any positive role models, you have third and fourth generations now of people who have never worked, and don't intend to.
The EXACT SAME THING happened in the US throughout the 70's, 80's & 90's. Usually it was high rise tenements rather than suburbs but the effects were identical. Most states have started new programs in the last decade in an effort to make these chronic welfare cases become responsible for themselves - the jury is still out. That's actually one of the reasons I fear free national healthcare here, I'm thinking it will actually cause some of these folks to slide back into a perpetual state of need.
"Part of the inhumanity of the computer is that, once it is competently programmed and working smoothly, it is completely honest." - Isaac Asimov
I disagree - it's the welfare payments and free housing that makes these people dependant on the state, not free health. You can't live on health care. You know they had career day in Bridgewater Primary ( so, girls of around 10 or 11 ) and they asked the kids what they wanted to do. The boys said 'go on the dole' and the girls said 'I'll have a baby in a few years, then I'll get money from the government'. They know they get a one of payment and regular income for breeding. The money goes up for each child they have. It's pathetic.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
Christian Graus wrote:
The government at one point stupidly decided to CREATE a suburb of long term unemployed people. So, in the absence of any positive role models, you have third and fourth generations now of people who have never worked, and don't intend to.
The EXACT SAME THING happened in the US throughout the 70's, 80's & 90's. Usually it was high rise tenements rather than suburbs but the effects were identical. Most states have started new programs in the last decade in an effort to make these chronic welfare cases become responsible for themselves - the jury is still out. That's actually one of the reasons I fear free national healthcare here, I'm thinking it will actually cause some of these folks to slide back into a perpetual state of need.
"Part of the inhumanity of the computer is that, once it is competently programmed and working smoothly, it is completely honest." - Isaac Asimov
Mike Mullikin wrote:
The EXACT SAME THING happened in the US throughout the 70's, 80's & 90's. Usually it was high rise tenements rather than suburbs but the effects were identical. Most states have started new programs in the last decade in an effort to make these chronic welfare cases become responsible for themselves - the jury is still out.
The same thing happened in the UK in the 60s/70s. Huge swathes of countryside were chewed up as local councils decided that the way to handle the situation was to put all the unemployed people into 'council estates' (usually right next to peaceful residential areas). Naturally, most of these areas have turned into black holes.
-
I disagree - it's the welfare payments and free housing that makes these people dependant on the state, not free health. You can't live on health care. You know they had career day in Bridgewater Primary ( so, girls of around 10 or 11 ) and they asked the kids what they wanted to do. The boys said 'go on the dole' and the girls said 'I'll have a baby in a few years, then I'll get money from the government'. They know they get a one of payment and regular income for breeding. The money goes up for each child they have. It's pathetic.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
You can't live on health care.
True, but it would be viewed as just one more freebie from the government. One more instance where they can expect someone else to care for them. IMO - It would add to the whole mindset.
"Part of the inhumanity of the computer is that, once it is competently programmed and working smoothly, it is completely honest." - Isaac Asimov
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
The EXACT SAME THING happened in the US throughout the 70's, 80's & 90's. Usually it was high rise tenements rather than suburbs but the effects were identical. Most states have started new programs in the last decade in an effort to make these chronic welfare cases become responsible for themselves - the jury is still out.
The same thing happened in the UK in the 60s/70s. Huge swathes of countryside were chewed up as local councils decided that the way to handle the situation was to put all the unemployed people into 'council estates' (usually right next to peaceful residential areas). Naturally, most of these areas have turned into black holes.
Lets get the conversation were it belongs guys. The raisng of these kids. I was raised by a woman on welfare, recieved state aid etc.. and do you know what would've happened to me if I were to throw a rock ata cop for ANY reason? My butt would STILL be hurting 39 years later. People blame society WAYYY to much for thier own shortcomings.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
You can't live on health care.
True, but it would be viewed as just one more freebie from the government. One more instance where they can expect someone else to care for them. IMO - It would add to the whole mindset.
"Part of the inhumanity of the computer is that, once it is competently programmed and working smoothly, it is completely honest." - Isaac Asimov
I tend to agree with a medical safety net, like anything, it needs checks and balances to control abuse
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
Lets get the conversation were it belongs guys. The raisng of these kids. I was raised by a woman on welfare, recieved state aid etc.. and do you know what would've happened to me if I were to throw a rock ata cop for ANY reason? My butt would STILL be hurting 39 years later. People blame society WAYYY to much for thier own shortcomings.
I knew a guy whose mother was a welfare mother, and he was one of the most driven people I have met, he was determined to be more in his life. Some people just have that. But, most people inherit their values from those shown by their parents. This is kind of my point, the mentality of the people I'm talking about is by and large that they have kids because babies are cute, and they get money for them ( my wife's 'friend' was recently moaning to her on the phone that they don't know what to do when their eldest is 16, as their pay will go down. They discussed having another as the main viable option ), but they don't do anything to 'raise' them. Like I said, the primary school is focused on feeding these kids and keeping them alive. They actually run free meals in the school in Bridgewater, so the kids get fed. The office staff buy clothes out of their own pockets for the most neglected of the kids. The approach is all wrong. And, you're right, there are single mothers who raise kids well, just like there are families with jobs who fail to do so. But, it's definatley true that more of the single mothers on welfare, at least in my area, suck at it and don't care, than any other group I know of.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
Lets get the conversation were it belongs guys. The raisng of these kids. I was raised by a woman on welfare, recieved state aid etc.. and do you know what would've happened to me if I were to throw a rock ata cop for ANY reason? My butt would STILL be hurting 39 years later. People blame society WAYYY to much for thier own shortcomings.
mnvkng76 wrote:
Lets get the conversation were it belongs guys.
The conversation is that the creation of residential centres of welfare typically does not create an environment where people are inspired to do anything else other than continue on welfare living. We are talking about the general situation here. Obviously when looking at individual cases then this is not always the same.
-
mnvkng76 wrote:
Lets get the conversation were it belongs guys.
The conversation is that the creation of residential centres of welfare typically does not create an environment where people are inspired to do anything else other than continue on welfare living. We are talking about the general situation here. Obviously when looking at individual cases then this is not always the same.
Blaming the government for the values a kid has does nothing. I am NOT saying that most current welfare systems( I won't dare speak for other countries as I do not have any experience with thier systems) do a good job at promoting self dependence. It is obvious in the US that there needs to be reformation in this area, but the artical in question deals with kids throwing rocks at policmen. How does that have anything to do with the endless loop of welfare? This problem isn't confined to the welfare centrers. You only hear about these occurneces because of where they took place. I live in a very nice area, and know some VERY well off people. Thier kids are , with a few notable exceptions, some of the most spoiled brats that society has ever produced. Why? has nothing to do with welfare in this case. Its because Of what I said before, bad parenting. Of course its not Pc to bring this up, nor does it do anything to berate the government of (insert country here) so its not cool.
-
Blaming the government for the values a kid has does nothing. I am NOT saying that most current welfare systems( I won't dare speak for other countries as I do not have any experience with thier systems) do a good job at promoting self dependence. It is obvious in the US that there needs to be reformation in this area, but the artical in question deals with kids throwing rocks at policmen. How does that have anything to do with the endless loop of welfare? This problem isn't confined to the welfare centrers. You only hear about these occurneces because of where they took place. I live in a very nice area, and know some VERY well off people. Thier kids are , with a few notable exceptions, some of the most spoiled brats that society has ever produced. Why? has nothing to do with welfare in this case. Its because Of what I said before, bad parenting. Of course its not Pc to bring this up, nor does it do anything to berate the government of (insert country here) so its not cool.
The point I was making is that the welfare system encourages people to stay jobless, encourages people with no interest in parenting to breed, and encourages enclaves of people with no positive role models or opportunities to do better than their parents did.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
Christian Graus wrote:
You can't live on health care.
True, but it would be viewed as just one more freebie from the government. One more instance where they can expect someone else to care for them. IMO - It would add to the whole mindset.
"Part of the inhumanity of the computer is that, once it is competently programmed and working smoothly, it is completely honest." - Isaac Asimov
Form a UK perspective - a country with free health care - I agree with Christian. If people don't have money to spend on beer their perspective changes! We have a situation here where you have generations on the dole and we have to import skilled people (at a higher cost the local ones when you add everything together).
-
Lets get the conversation were it belongs guys. The raisng of these kids. I was raised by a woman on welfare, recieved state aid etc.. and do you know what would've happened to me if I were to throw a rock ata cop for ANY reason? My butt would STILL be hurting 39 years later. People blame society WAYYY to much for thier own shortcomings.
Good for her! It's those who aren't so driven that are the problem.
-
Blaming the government for the values a kid has does nothing. I am NOT saying that most current welfare systems( I won't dare speak for other countries as I do not have any experience with thier systems) do a good job at promoting self dependence. It is obvious in the US that there needs to be reformation in this area, but the artical in question deals with kids throwing rocks at policmen. How does that have anything to do with the endless loop of welfare? This problem isn't confined to the welfare centrers. You only hear about these occurneces because of where they took place. I live in a very nice area, and know some VERY well off people. Thier kids are , with a few notable exceptions, some of the most spoiled brats that society has ever produced. Why? has nothing to do with welfare in this case. Its because Of what I said before, bad parenting. Of course its not Pc to bring this up, nor does it do anything to berate the government of (insert country here) so its not cool.
mnvkng76 wrote:
Blaming the government for the values a kid has does nothing.
Nobody is blaming the government for kid's bad values here. Likewise, no one is saying that bad parenting isn't a problem. The issue is that, after several generations living in such dependence, sometimes the parents themselves have no concept of what is right and wrong. As for the rest, Christian said it very succinctly.
-
Form a UK perspective - a country with free health care - I agree with Christian. If people don't have money to spend on beer their perspective changes! We have a situation here where you have generations on the dole and we have to import skilled people (at a higher cost the local ones when you add everything together).
Trollslayer wrote:
free health care
There is no such thing. Not even in your country. Someone is sure as hell paying for it.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Trollslayer wrote:
free health care
There is no such thing. Not even in your country. Someone is sure as hell paying for it.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Yes, there is a levy which adds 1% to our taxes. Nothing is free. But, I do approve of the idea of society working together, rather than every man for himself. Apart from anything else, I'd rather pay the 1% than have someone rob my house to raise money for medicine.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
Christian Graus wrote:
The government at one point stupidly decided to CREATE a suburb of long term unemployed people. So, in the absence of any positive role models, you have third and fourth generations now of people who have never worked, and don't intend to.
The EXACT SAME THING happened in the US throughout the 70's, 80's & 90's. Usually it was high rise tenements rather than suburbs but the effects were identical. Most states have started new programs in the last decade in an effort to make these chronic welfare cases become responsible for themselves - the jury is still out. That's actually one of the reasons I fear free national healthcare here, I'm thinking it will actually cause some of these folks to slide back into a perpetual state of need.
"Part of the inhumanity of the computer is that, once it is competently programmed and working smoothly, it is completely honest." - Isaac Asimov
Mike Mullikin wrote:
That's actually one of the reasons I fear free national healthcare here, I'm thinking it will actually cause some of these folks to slide back into a perpetual state of need.
It's much too late to worry about that. Medicaid[^]has provided essentially free healthcare to low income families since 1965. Free national health care isn't about the poor (as much as Democrats would have you believe so) it's about coverage of that part of the middle class that doesn't get employer sponsored health insurance...a group that is too well off to qualify for medicaid, but can't afford the full cost of health insurance.
-
I disagree - it's the welfare payments and free housing that makes these people dependant on the state, not free health. You can't live on health care. You know they had career day in Bridgewater Primary ( so, girls of around 10 or 11 ) and they asked the kids what they wanted to do. The boys said 'go on the dole' and the girls said 'I'll have a baby in a few years, then I'll get money from the government'. They know they get a one of payment and regular income for breeding. The money goes up for each child they have. It's pathetic.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/59/57/1851366.pdf[^] is an interesting document dealing with healthcare and education in poverty. <quote> The poor are the principal beneficiaries of universal access to social services. ● Instead of thinking in terms of supply, we need to meet the demand for services from the poor. ● Policies should be judged by their outcomes rather than by the amount of resources employed. ● Coherent, long-term and participatory policy are needed to escape from the poverty trap. </quote> And some worthwhile objectives are stated here http://www.pdhre.org/rights/poverty.html[^]
-
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/59/57/1851366.pdf[^] is an interesting document dealing with healthcare and education in poverty. <quote> The poor are the principal beneficiaries of universal access to social services. ● Instead of thinking in terms of supply, we need to meet the demand for services from the poor. ● Policies should be judged by their outcomes rather than by the amount of resources employed. ● Coherent, long-term and participatory policy are needed to escape from the poverty trap. </quote> And some worthwhile objectives are stated here http://www.pdhre.org/rights/poverty.html[^]
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Coherent, long-term and participatory policy.
AKA "Capitalism".
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Yes, there is a levy which adds 1% to our taxes. Nothing is free. But, I do approve of the idea of society working together, rather than every man for himself. Apart from anything else, I'd rather pay the 1% than have someone rob my house to raise money for medicine.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
Yes, there is a levy which adds 1% to our taxes.
I find that hard to believe unless: a) Your health care is not universal, b)Your taxes are already incredibly high, or c) Your population is very young, and extrodinarily healthy. Otherwise, somehow, someway, you must be paying more than that.
Christian Graus wrote:
But, I do approve of the idea of society working together, rather than every man for himself. Apart from anything else, I'd rather pay the 1% than have someone rob my house to raise money for medicine.
I have no problem if Australia wants to follow that principle. As an American, however, I am very uncomfortable being part of any government regulated and managed social initiative unless my country is under attack and I'm needed to defend it. The very thought of it is a violation of the core principles our government was founded upon. What I want is to be given every opportunity to provide for my own care (health or otherwise) in a free market society and to provide whatever I can in personnal Christian charity for those very few who cannot do likewise.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Coherent, long-term and participatory policy.
AKA "Capitalism".
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Yes, there is a levy which adds 1% to our taxes.
I find that hard to believe unless: a) Your health care is not universal, b)Your taxes are already incredibly high, or c) Your population is very young, and extrodinarily healthy. Otherwise, somehow, someway, you must be paying more than that.
Christian Graus wrote:
But, I do approve of the idea of society working together, rather than every man for himself. Apart from anything else, I'd rather pay the 1% than have someone rob my house to raise money for medicine.
I have no problem if Australia wants to follow that principle. As an American, however, I am very uncomfortable being part of any government regulated and managed social initiative unless my country is under attack and I'm needed to defend it. The very thought of it is a violation of the core principles our government was founded upon. What I want is to be given every opportunity to provide for my own care (health or otherwise) in a free market society and to provide whatever I can in personnal Christian charity for those very few who cannot do likewise.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
I would have thought that a core principle of a government is the care and protection of its citizens. The provision of good quality education and healthcare should in my opinion be a core principle. It is no doubt a matter of honour and principle to offer some charitable donations as long as governments are not expecting charities to assume the exclusive role of provisioning of welfare.