welfare recipients deserve a raise

[azazel]

Originally Posted by jenai

disability can either be via PWD status for welfare except if CPP was big enough to do it federally.
or there could be a lawsuit to sue whoever's responsible for the injury -- which is maybe if the sued decide not to pay after judgment, plus you gotta consider the stress on the plaintiff.

as for letting a charity or church be in charge of welfare, I think the reason why the gov't handles it now is because churches and charities bungled it before the state took over.

a church could exclude anyone not in their churches from getting welfare. a charity could spend 75 percent of its funding on staffing and 25 percent on the welfare recipients.

however, i proposed the UBI solution which would tax people fairly and welfare would cease to exist.

i think the UBI is not taxed. any income is taxed. this could be before income or after depending on what works best

Google "Universal Basic Income"

far as i know the churches downtown will give homeless people a place to stay and food to eat, regardless of their religious affiliation. you've also got 'humanist' societies who sometimes want to help out.

on the other hand, the gov't makes money on exacerbating a problem, hence why they give out free crack pipes and other gear to drug addicts so they can maintain that whole 'health care' scheme that has become their nest egg. kinda like the war on drugs.

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by azazel

why can't a church or charity be in charge of welfare and not the chronically mental gov't?

Because a church or charity doesn't input nearly as much money as the government does.

You know any churches in the area that are prepared to give $900 a month to thousands of people?

[azazel]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

Because a church or charity doesn't input nearly as much money as the government does.

You know any churches in the area that are prepared to give $900 a month to thousands of people?

85% of Canadian adults donate to charity: StatsCan

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by azazel

85% of Canadian adults donate to charity: StatsCan

It's a lot easier to tell a stranger you donate/volunteer then to actually donate/volunteer.

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by azazel

85% of Canadian adults donate to charity: StatsCan

It's not frequency, it's quantity. 100 people donating a buck is still just the same as one person giving $100.

You think people pay anywhere near as much to charity as they do on taxes? A lot of people give to charity to get a break on their taxes fer chrissakes!

[azazel]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

It's a lot easier to tell a stranger you donate/volunteer then to actually donate/volunteer.

this is statscan, not your fucken highschool project

[ebbomega]

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

[jenai]

this is why they invented junk food, created the manufactured domesticated animals food industry, and allow beverage companies to mix fructose in vitamin drinks.

each one of these industries is a vector for metabolic syndrome, PMS and endocrine disorders, tho in the latter case, it appears to be manufacturing female consumers who don't need boob jobs and :HAVE: fine booty but have a zen for stimulants. however, xenestrogens derived from pesticides, growth hormones and antibiotics are producing more incidents of infertility and pesticide related birth defects and cancers.

we'd like to think it's more protein in the diet that is producing early physical maturity among teenagers but it could be the result of naturally occurring GHB in beef which, in its purified form, used to be used to promote muscle growth in body building circles.

tho there could be a xenestrogen that could do the same thing, but be derived from adulterating beef with antibiotics, pesticides and growth hormones.

[ebbomega]

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by azazel

this is statscan, not your fucken highschool project

Statscan gives a very broad generalization. And as ebb pointed out, in this study they are doing the total dollars donated, divided among the adult population of Canada.

So dollarwise, the ammount donated per person is way off.

And stats can is a questionaire, that is based on the honor system. So yes, people will lie, espically when it comes to something as abstract as "Do you donate money to charity?"

[jenai]

the link between diabetes, cancer and PMS may be due more to low essential fatty acid omega-3 and high omega-6.

but precocious physical maturation is supposedly due to "good" genes and nothing more.

i vote it's the rise in eating out at fastfood joints, which serve protein rich food and high fructose rich beverages and salty french fries.

edit: tho i am pretty sure the widening gap between rich and poor is due to food subsidies for the noname brands at real Canadian SuperStore, Safeway and Walmart.

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by jenai

this is why they invented junk food, created the manufactured domesticated animals food industry, and allow beverage companies to mix fructose in vitamin drinks.

each one of these industries is a vector for metabolic syndrome, PMS and endocrine disorders, tho in the latter case, it appears to be manufacturing female consumers who don't need boob jobs and :HAVE: fine booty but have a zen for stimulants. however, xenestrogens derived from pesticides, growth hormones and antibiotics are producing more incidents of infertility and pesticide related birth defects and cancers.

we'd like to think it's more protein in the diet that is producing early physical maturity among teenagers but it could be the result of naturally occurring GHB in beef which, in its purified form, used to be used to promote muscle growth in body building circles.

tho there could be a xenestrogen that could do the same thing, but be derived from adulterating beef with antibiotics, pesticides and growth hormones.

God damn, I hope you accidently posted this in the wrong thread, cause this makes no fucking sense in regards to this topic.

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by azazel

on the other hand, the gov't makes money on exacerbating a problem, hence why they give out free crack pipes and other gear to drug addicts so they can maintain that whole 'health care' scheme that has become their nest egg. kinda like the war on drugs.

And by the way, how does the government treating drug addiction equal a "scheme" or money in a public heath care system?

[impure]

there's so many types of jobs, i just don't get how someone "can't" work because of physical limitations.

[miss.myra]

Welfare is ideally a temporary fix for tough situations and came out of the Great Depression.

Do you feel conditions are the same now as they are then?


If they deserve a raise, I'm certain welfare recipients know how they can go and get it. :)

[ebbomega]

Actually no, welfare was around in Canada long before the Great Depression.

[miss.myra]

really? i actually didn't know that. source?

[ebbomega]

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=031...3E2.0.CO%3B2-3

AFAIK, one of the first studies that showed that welfare improved the economy was around the turn of the 20th Century.

[cinist]

The ignorance on this board is astounding, seems the crazy guy has got a leg up on a lot of you.

[miss.myra]

I don't know, I don't think it's that far off to say that welfare is intended to be a temporary fix for people in not so great circumstances. If someone needs something beyond 'temporary', that's why things like disability, etc. are in place.

IMHO I think that rather than giving welfare recipients a raise, it's about time the government started investing more money towards solutions for the mentally ill. The 'experiment' of closing Riverview went horribly, horribly wrong. A lot of the poorest of the poor are suffering from mental illness and are not getting the treatment that they deserve because there's not enough room in what we do have available, which already is too little.

[ebbomega]

I agree with a lot of what you say, Myra. But I still say that welfare is a bit more than a temporary fix... I think it's a necessary social service to keep a healthy populous and economy.

But I def. agree that the money could be better spent on making welfare an administration or institution instead of a handout. Care is what we need, and that doesn't just mean money.

So again this gets us back to my original question - is a raise really going to help those on welfare, or is it just going to buy them another bag of weed so they can get stoned more often? And I think you're right. Leave the rate where it's at and instead focus that money in services. And as much of a leftist as I am, I really think the Libs would be the best ones to implement that. The tough part is convincing them to implement it in the first place.

[azazel]

Originally Posted by impure

there's so many types of jobs, i just don't get how someone "can't" work because of physical limitations.

yea. what about data entry. or even modding a larger type forum? they pay ppl to do that now

[jenai]

Originally Posted by azazel

yea. what about data entry. or even modding a larger type forum? they pay ppl to do that now

i want to be an internet cop.

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by jenai

i want to be an internet cop.

First requisite is to not suck at the internet.