They live on the dole because they know that they have something to fall back on and are likely to take on a more 'relaxed' stance in regards to maintaining/getting a job.Originally Posted by Nessus
They live on the dole because they know that they have something to fall back on and are likely to take on a more 'relaxed' stance in regards to maintaining/getting a job.
What will they fall back on after the dole? The pay-dirt? At least get your sound-bytes right, you dumb twit.
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
^^Well they could, you know, find themselves a paying job (like any other normal youth) and not rely on tax payers money.
Could they
Could they fucking really
You're a fucking luminary, aren't you
Can you also define "normal youth" for me?
Which kind of exceptions to "normal" are you willing to tolerate?
Are cripples okay? Can they not work? Should their stumpy little hands be used for toiling, or soap? Or do we use hard-earned, sweat of someone's brow tax money on feeding them?
The number of people abusing the system designed to encourage re-entry to the work force in the Nordic countries has been found to be so insignificant as to be considered nominal. The much-hated "wel-fare queen" or the fat slob living off your hard earned, sweat of your brow tax money man, largely do not exist outside right-wing campaign slogans. That you post this putrid filth in good faith makes you a campaign poster, and I'm not sure for which side.
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
Yes.Could they
Yes they could. I don't know where you live, but at least here in Australia, anyone from the age of 14 can find a casual/part time job in a fast food place, clothing store, etc. I'm assuming it's the same in the rest of the Western world.Could they fucking really
I thought it was obvious from my previous post that by 'normal youth' I meant those who go out there and earn their own money. You're not that bright are you?Can you also define "normal youth" for me?
So you think it's ok that the government taxes the average citizen to support someone who is more than capable of finding part time employment? I think you're the one posting putrid filth.
Someone the age of 60 could find a job in a clothing store? Really? Orstraelieor's a mysterious place, I guess.
Again, you're arguing for rights that don't exist, posited by people benefiting from the labour they despised, using blanket terms such as normalcy and average tax payer (what the fuck, man) to justify your stupidity and unwillingness to look at anything beyond political campaign slogans. And you called me dumb while doing so, you're an Internet pro!
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
So you think kids should be forced to work rather than get to be kids? Should a 14 year old buy their own clothes and food?
Kids should be free to enjoy their youth. Even in college/uni. That's what that time of your life is for, not being a miniature adult. Plenty of time for that later.
^^I thought we were talking about people of a younger age. Nobody said anything about 60 year olds.
And what rights don't exist to you?
I picked it up from your personal attacks against me, so it's you who's the internet pro.And you called me dumb while doing so, you're an Internet pro!
I agree with you, but not at the expense of the tax payer. All 14 year olds I've known lived with their parents, and some of them began working at that age. Sure, there are exceptional circumstances, but the majority are not. And these kids in high school live with parents/guardians, and in the case where they have parents to support them, the government shouldn't be giving them money.
I am rubber, you are glue.
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
So a kid should be a kid, but only if his or her parents can afford it? Sounds like a great way to continue a cycle of poverty (or lesser means, anyway). Nothing's perfect.
We're stuck in a bloody snowglobe.
I hear kids did pretty well in the coal mines
Damn parents not having money
I'm sure we could draw parallels to current life in say, India
But those people are brown! How average tax payer is that? Ugh!
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
No, college/uni is precisely the time for being an adult, they are an adult at that age. As for high school/college (UK) students, being a miniature adult is not only appropriate its how most I've known then wanted to get treated. They don't and have to support themselves but that's the perfect time to start learning a few life lessons. Want to go out, regular new clothes (as in I've worn this once, not I have nothing to wear), new gadgets - get a PT job and start supporting yourself.
I don't think my parents were bad parents because I had a PT job at 16.
What, do you think you should be 'a kid' until 22 and then suddenly have responsibilities for the first time? I find that both harsh and condescending.
I don't know how it is where you live, but all the kids I've ever known in my city/state have lived with their parents, who were capable of supporting them, either up until the age of 18 (then moved out to live on their own) or they continued living with their parents whilst maintaining a part time job. This isn't India or some other country where there are noticeable divides between rich and poor.
But you're lumping all kids into one big group. It's one thing to get a PT job for fun money, quite another if it's to buy food. You don't like the money going to the kid directly, because they might fritter it away. But adding it to the family subsidy has flaws, too.
Tim's article mentioned homeless kids from bad home lives, living on the street, falling through the cracks. Those kids wouldn't benefit if parents got the extra money. That's the glitch---how to keep disadvantaged teens in school with enough of the basics, so they don't have to work to support themselves while studying.
Instead of tackling this from the angle of "Look how lazy people are, taking tax money, living off the dole!".....the real challenge is "How do we keep kids fed and sheltered, attending school, getting an education, moving out of the cycle of poverty?" If the EMA doesn't work right, what's the alternative? More social workers to evaluate home situations, or more youth hostels for emancipated minors, or....?
I agree that they shouldn't not have food, but we are already paying the mother so that they can have food, as has been said repeatedly above the mother gets welfare as well as the "child". They do not need this subsidy for food as the mother is already buying their food so what do they need this for? Fun money.
Homeless kids, kids not living with parents etc are a special case and should be treated as a special case. I have said all along there should be an alternative, but rather than giving half a billion pounds to well-fed kids and letting the real disadvantaged ones slip through the cracks, how about we instead target the special cases?
Not familiar with the history of your EMA, but was it started because teenaged students (on 'family welfare') weren't able to buy school supplies? That's one problem the US has with subsidies for general child care---simply cutting a check to parents doesn't mean the child benefits. That's one reason why subsidized breakfast and lunch are offered at school, and why food aid comes in a debit card that's keyed not to accept paying for things like 'booze or fags' (or even certain foods like chips) or cash withdrawals.
At the end of the day, though, parents are charged with being responsible with the money they get, meant for taking care of the family. Coats, shoes, backpacks, school supplies--those are things charities are known to provide, because either (a) welfare money can't be stretched far enough or (b) the parents don't spend wisely.
No offense to Social Workers, because they provide an invaluable service, but IMO every family receiving welfare could benefit from a Financial Planner type person. Someone to sit down with them and review the bills, how they shop and spend money, plan meals, set priorities.
I've bitched before about women on welfare using their debit cards to buy high-end groceries (Juicy Juice, pre-mixed Similac, shredded cheese instead of brick cheese), while they're wearing expensive clothing, have fancy salon nails and hair-dos, driving off in a newer car. But I've come to learn that's because they never learned how to budget or plan their money. After years of living paycheck-to-paycheck, a bit more money just means more to spend. Saving isn't part of their mind-set, if they've learned a Helpless Hopeless attitude.
Similar to children from food-poor homes that eat ravenously when groceries come home, better fill up now while it's here. At the end of the month all that's left are some cans of soup and powdered milk. Their parents taught them that, by showing better get my hair done now while I can or I may be poor but can at least have nice shoes.
It's that learned cycle that needs to be changed, and could be improved. Instead of deeming an entire group of people lazy or greedy, maybe they just don't know any better?
No it was not. The EMA is a very modern invention, started by Gordon Brown for the last government and scrapped by this one, it does not exactly have a long and distinguished history.
It is a bribe, pure and simple. The argument was that there was a lower proportion of students from poorer backgrounds staying on from school to college, so by paying them to stay on they will. No argument for needs, just that paying by people to stay they'll stay. There was not a very noticeable change in staying-on rates.
I disagree that you can't learn how to save from a poor background, my parents came from a very poor background living pay-check to pay-check at first, so my mum new all the ways to save money - go into the store 5 min before closing to get cheap bread on its last day etc, as my parents incomes rose, my mum continued to scrimp and save and buy cheap items - and still does to this day. The idea that you'd "better get these nice shoes now" is ridiculous and stupid.
That depends on who we're talking about. Some kids and some parents are working with smaller margins than are we privileged tWF members. Some youths have more or harder work at school (or uni!), or worse mental health, or worse physical health. Some parents already have to work too much, so much so that the gains from having them be able to spend more quality time with their family may be worth more to my society than the "gains" from working them half to death.
I don't think that having a part-time job is necessarily a waste in and of itself. I think it's very valuable to any kid that can manage it. But I don't know which kids those may be and I'm not convinced we should try to find out by experimenting with their lives and their futures.
At uni I think it's safe to say that for many students a part time job can really be a significant time-waster. Studying well at uni takes time and energy and relaxation and tends to be different in nature from most regular jobs. If your work has to do with your studies then that's great, but if your work involves doing useless shit for money when you could/should be studying/sleeping/sexing then you're a very unfortunate dummy.
I note that you're bringing up matters of principle, about being treated as an adult, etc. I get that, but I don't think you should disregard the differences between uni studies and most regular post-uni jobs, or between uni students and adults with established lives and careers. Principles are nice but they shouldn't get in the way of getting great results
I find that strange. I think that eliminating important and unnecessary unfairness is one of the most appropriate tasks of a modern government, not only for the feelgoods but also for economic reasons. You keep talking about spending tax-payers' money, implying waste, but I still don't know enough about the other side of the equation--what the govt. gets back in terms of future taxes, present/future health, positive impact on future generations, etc--to be able to agree with you.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
So they failed to abuse the handouts?
It makes sense if you have little hope/faith in your [immediate/distant] future or are just plain worn out mentally. If you want a shining and very immediate example Munchkin comes to mind. Who's going to bother wearing condoms to protect against AIDS if they know they're very likely to die of malaria next week?I disagree that you can't learn how to save from a poor background, my parents came from a very poor background living pay-check to pay-check at first, so my mum new all the ways to save money - go into the store 5 min before closing to get cheap bread on its last day etc, as my parents incomes rose, my mum continued to scrimp and save and buy cheap items - and still does to this day. The idea that you'd "better get these nice shoes now" is ridiculous and stupid.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Rand, refresh my memory: when we had a debate about NYC paying kids to get good grades and stay in school, were you pro or con?
Also, I didn't say people from poor backgrounds can't learn how to save, just that we have multi-generational families still on welfare that don't learn how to save.
You're coming from the attitude that all people living and/or raised in poverty may also share your family's culture and history. Akin to, "If my parents were poor and managed to pull themselves out of poverty, then everyone can". That's probably a false assumption.
"Doing useless shit for money" is valuable in itself. To any employer some work experience is better than no work experience, even if it is not obviously related to the course.
This is absolutely true but I was talking about value for the student, eg. a student of natural sciences. Let them work during the summers
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
What's that supposed to mean?So they failed to abuse the handouts?
No, if you have no faith in your immediate future then that makes it all the more important to save for a rainy day. Better to save for those nice shoes than go hungry next week while wearing said shoes.It makes sense if you have little hope/faith in your [immediate/distant] future or are just plain worn out mentally. If you want a shining and very immediate example Munchkin comes to mind. Who's going to bother wearing condoms to protect against AIDS if they know they're very likely to die of malaria next week?
Didn't take part in the discussion. I'd say anti though, without having taken part, its not what should be necessary.
Nor do they need to. The fact that we have "multi-generational families still on welfare" should be a concern in itself!Also, I didn't say people from poor backgrounds can't learn how to save, just that we have multi-generational families still on welfare that don't learn how to save.
Similar to the notion that there's no worse non-smoker than an ex-smoker?You're coming from the attitude that all people living and/or raised in poverty may also share your family's culture and history. Akin to, "If my parents were poor and managed to pull themselves out of poverty, then everyone can". That's probably a false assumption.
No, it is true. In our western societies we don't really have genuine poverty anyway the word is so debased unfortunately nowadays, but poor people who work hard can and do make a difference in their lives. The shame is that those who try get heavily penalised by excessive taxation to fund those who don't.
A student getting a job after graduation is not of value to the student?This is absolutely true but I was talking about value for the student, eg. a student of natural sciences. Let them work during the summers
I only worked in the summer (winter, Easter etc) while at uni too. During that time I saved up enough fun-money together with my student loans to get me through, but I had to budget. I got no allowance either from the state or from my parents.
I was thinking the same thing.So they failed to abuse the handouts?
It makes sense if you have little hope/faith in your [immediate/distant] future or are just plain worn out mentally. If you want a shining and very immediate example Munchkin comes to mind. Who's going to bother wearing condoms to protect against AIDS if they know they're very likely to die of malaria next week?Unfortunately, that kind of short term thinking, living day-by-day or paycheck-to-paycheck is all too common (in the US). It's the stuff that gangs, pimps, and drug dealers are ready to exploit.
If everyone you know and love has been hooked on drugs, joined a gang, been arrested for assault and battery, become a teen parent, dropped out of HS, landed in jail or prison, relied on welfare or charity for basic needs, been homeless, or died 'prematurely'.....it takes a special type of person with incredible mental health to find a way out of that cycle. Not many have that, that's why it's a pernicious negative cycle.
I'd have thought they'd stay in school in order to get that booze-money
Look, you can roll your eyes all you like, but that's how many people think/feel. I'm not saying it's wise. Saving for a rainy day doesn't guarantee awesomeness when the rain comes, and after you get drenched for the third time it's like why botherNo, if you have no faith in your immediate future then that makes it all the more important to save for a rainy day. Better to save for those nice shoes than go hungry next week while wearing said shoes.
I personally don't care for shoes and abhor hunger, some people don't think hunger is that big a deal but enjoy getting feelgoods from having beautiful (ish) shoes.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Of course it is, and that value has to be weighed against the possible negative impact of work (during the semester) on studying. It's not unknown for things to have both pros and cons
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Of course, that is a Learned Behavior or Attitude. You can ignore what others are experiencing, and try to pretend ignorance because it doesn't match up with your personal perspective....or you can acknowledge the disparity. It's that gap where public policy loses traction.No, if you have no faith in your immediate future then that makes it all the more important to save for a rainy day. Better to save for those nice shoes than go hungry next week while wearing said shoes.
They tried to connect educational success with money, assuming poor students might see it as other (well-off) kid sees an allowance for good grades, or that good grades lead to college, and college leads to employment. It didn't work and they ended up halting the experimental program. I think they decided parents and home environments are more important for instilling those values. Now some schools are considering fining parents if their kids are truant or get failing grades, and assigning a Grade to parents for their parenting......Didn't take part in the discussion. I'd say anti though, without having taken part, its not what should be necessary.
Sure, but some of that blame should be placed on underfunded agencies or inadequate social workers, and the legislators that made bad decisions. We hear plenty of whining about the Nanny State, wanting to get rid of the Nanny because she's too expensive. Fine and dandy in principle, but the answer isn't to just fire the Nanny and leave people floundering. If part of the problem is how Nanny "raises" generations of "children", then Nanny needs to revamp what's being taught.Nor do they need to. The fact that we have "multi-generational families still on welfare" should be a concern in itself!
To any employer in certain fields, you mean. In others, it can be a minus instead of a plus on the CV if you've spent time in fast food instead of doing summer classes. Just as in some fields it's better to stay silent about your PhD and just present yourself as a master's degree.
In addition, time spent in part-time jobs or what have you implicitly means less time spent on studies. Which means you graduate later rather than sooner. Now of course no one can study effectively for 16 hours a day, but I'd argue they get less of their 8 hours in the books if they've spent another 8 behind the grill or counter.
Society wants people to graduate fast, because we value experts more than the people behind the grill at McDonald's.
Of course with pre-uni students their graduation time is more or less dictated beforehand, but why do we bother keeping them in the class room if they're not interested, or don't have enough time to do home-work in-depth?
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
