NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/alt/fan/rushlim/10840

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-29 | 5.6 KB

Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10840 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show:64 talk.abortion:53464
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show,talk.abortion
Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!vengeanc
From: [e-mail] ()
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Net Noise owner)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 02:09:31 GMT
Lines: 99

[e-mail] (Jared Dahl) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (JIM GRAHAM) writes:
>|> Without admitting to whether I'm pro-life or pro-abortion, I
>|> have to say that whenever these jokes we call "social programs"
>|> become truly fair, I'll consider this a valid argument.
>|>
>|> I personally know at least four families who are more interested in
>|> sucking blood from these programs than getting jobs and becoming
>|> responsible.
>|>
>|> One of them actually sells their foodstamps to others.
>|>
>|> This all makes me sick, and when my tax dollars are spent on those
>|> who truly need them, rather than the welfare society that our know-it-all
>|> liberals have created, I'll be the first to use the above argument.

>First of all, I didn't see Reagan, Bush, Ford, or Nixon trying
>to reform the welfare laws.  They are a product of both parties.

>Second, fraud is not as prevalent in these programs as you would
>think, but it is a problem.

EXCUUUUSE ME?  In New York City the government spends $18,000/year
on EACH homeless person.  Where is this money going?  If this money
went directly for college you could pay for four years of school using
just one year of these funds for each homeless person.  This money has
to be going SOMEWHERE, but for the life of me I can't see where any of
it is going to the homeless people themselves.

>The real problem with our welfare system is that it "traps" people
>into a cycle of poverty, from which they cannot emerge.  Many people
>cannot afford to live on welfare.  So they seek out a job.  If they
>can find one, it pays less than welfare does, and it will probably
>cause them to lose their welfare benefits.  So they stay out of work
>because they have kids to feed.  I think that this is one of the
>problems at the base of America's decline.  People are unable to
>work or can't find a job.  They are unable to raise their children
>with the values that they were raised with.  I think that the number
>of people strong willed enough to never want to work and leech off
>of society is smaller than you think.

You can earn more money working at McDonalds than on welfare.

Let's talk about welfare then... in this country we spend $7,000/year
per PERSON on welfare.  So an average family of 3-4 costs us around
$25,000 per year.  Are you trying to tell me there's not some incredible
fraud going on somewhere here?  Even if that money is just eaten up in
the bureaucracy it's still fraud. [These figures quoted from Jack Kemp's
speech at the Heritage Foundation to the freshman members of Congress.]

There are opportunities everywhere for those who want them.  Millions
of dollars of scholarships for women and minorities go unclaimed every
year.  Look at Clarence Thomas, whom liberals despise.  He took the
opportunities and became one of the most powerful men in the country.
Liberals can't stand to admit this because he's actually a conservative,
successful black man, and he didn't become successful through any lucky
natural athletic ability, but by educated himself.

God forbid a poor black man should work his way out of poverty without
the liberals there to hold his hand.

>When you give people jobs, you give them dignity.  With dignity, they
>can raise their children right, pass on morals and help keep a sense
>of order in our society.

Some might argue that being forced to take handouts eliminates dignity
and therefore the desire to seek a job in the first place.  If you want
to get many of these people back to work you have to remove their
incentives to stay in the situation they are currently in.

>How are we going to do this?  I don't know, but until we figure it
>out, these people have to eat somehow.  Welfare was never meant to
>be a permanent program, and it has not worked well in the long run.

"I don't know"-- spoken like a true liberal.  Welfare has become permanent.
Since FDR there are generations of families who have lived on welfare.
It will never work.  The cycle of poverty has shifted and is now perpetuated
by the welfare state.

>Jared Dahl
>Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's.
>Don't send e-mail - I won't get it.


Edward Simmonds


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Stupid obligatory sig to satisfy Tony Zugates                            -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-                                                                          -
- Example of Arrogance- the assumption that because one is an expert in    -
- an exact science that one's opinions on a completely unrelated and       -
- inexact science are ultimately superior to anyone else's                 -
-                                                                          -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------