~or~ It's Not The Government's Money
In re: this story: Maybe they shouldn't even be allowed to keep that flat screen and x-box.
VFD now that's just outrageous!
What is more outrageous? Demanding that people sell their possessisons to pay their own heating bills, or pointing a gun in a rich man's face and demanding that HE pay their bills? That is the choice.
But it's the government's money!
No, it's a rich man's money.
Well it's not fair that he has all that money!
It's not fair? It's not fair that he works 14 hour days and hasn't spent a weekend with his soon-to-be-EX-wife and children in two and a half years? It's not fair that he has an ulcer from worrying over his small business? It's his choice to bust his hump and get rich. It's not his choice to pay this family's heating bills. That choice is made for him by people who are elected by people who "need government help" to pay their bills. THAT is "not fair" my friend, not the income disparity between a rich man and a poor man!
In America today we have the case (repeated fifty million times over) where a person who takes from others via the government is voting for elected officials who make tax and income redistribution laws. This is the "bread and circuses" that destroyed the Roman empire. That is why I say people who get money or other subsidies "from the government" should have no voting privilege in the same year they receive benefits. Otherwise, we get . . . what we have.
I have always said this should be part of the program. Of course, right now I think there should be a moratorium on allowing anyone new to sign up as we don't have the money. Of course, the government never had the money, they just stole it from those who worked for it. But they have reached the point where there in nothing left to steal. So, they simply need to stop signing people up for services. Then in a few months hopefully the newly elected officials will actually do their jobs (I live to dream) and eliminate departments like HUD, or simply not fund it. AT which point we can tell the current moocher class that we can no longer afford to keep a roof over their heads and they'll have to take over. What's that you say? Can't afford it on their welfare checks? Guess they will need a job to go with the welfare. Oh, if there's a job there's no welfare? Gee, that's a Catch-22, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteSorry, I spent the day working in Big City ED and am left feeling a little snarky toward the intentionally helpless. And don't even get me started on the second and third generations of people who have never seen their name on a paycheck. While I am all for helping those who need it when they need it, there has never been a government program that ran with anything approaching efficiency and I am heartily sick of being held up to care for those who refuse to help themselves. Since government has proven to be unable to differentiate between the truly needy and the truly lazy (which seem to exist in far greater numbers) I just think these programs need to go away.
For now, at least keeping them from voting themselves more bread and circuses and keeping politicians from catering to them for their vote is a good start.
Oops, this is way longer than I meant it to be. Guess I'll drag my soapbox back into the corner and shut up.
Katia