Where Does One Sign-Up for a Free Obama-Phone?

[PLC1]

Lifeline service was set up years ago for those truly in need. Not a kickback gimme to "sail-phone" companies who donate to democrats.
Does every crack-head in Cleveland need a cell-phone?

Many of these things were not initiated by Obama--but it is how HE and his minions have changed the rules and made them go crazy out of whack--like he has with never-ending unemployment and food stamps.
He wants a welfare state and never-ending democrat majorities.

What would you like to see the president do to end food stamps and unemployment?

 

[Johnny Tremain]

What would you like to see the president do to end food stamps and unemployment?

Stop impeding free enterprise.
Instill self-reliance.

There is no need to END Food Stamps and Unemployment--just don't use them as a carrot for votes and to build a welfare state.
Free everything can get idiots elected (Obama).

Unemployment survived many decades at a 26-week limit.

Provide actual FOOD--so kids would actually GET IT--rather than negotiable food stamps.

 

[PLC1]

Stop impeding free enterprise.
Instill self-reliance.

There is no need to END Food Stamps and Unemployment--just don't use them as a carrot for votes and to build a welfare state.
Free everything can get idiots elected (Obama).

Unemployment survived many decades at a 26-week limit.

Provide actual FOOD--so kids would actually GET IT--rather than negotiable food stamps.

OK, first one is pretty general, but not something most of us would oppose.
No, there's no need to end food stamps and unemployment. The former is as much a subsidy for agriculture as it is welfare. The latter is not welfare, but an insurance plan that workers and employers pay into.
Provide food, from food banks rather than food stamps - now there's a good idea.

 

[GenSeneca]

No, there's no need to end food stamps and unemployment.

Yes there is... It's immoral. One person's misfortunes are not a legitimate claim to the fortunes of others.

 

[Gipper]

Yes there is... It's immoral. One person's misfortunes are not a legitimate claim to the fortunes of others.

That will get you nowhere. Americans are so brainwashed into the welfare state that comments like that will get you labeled a crazy heartless bastard.

Of course, you are right.

Before the stinking welfare state existed, Americans helped those less fortunate through their church/synagogue and the many organizations that USED to exist. Government was not involved and things worked out very well.

Sadly the cat is out of the bag and never to return.

 

[dogtowner]

That will get you nowhere. Americans are so brainwashed into the welfare state that comments like that will get you labeled a crazy heartless bastard.

Of course, you are right.

Before the stinking welfare state existed, Americans helped those less fortunate through their church/synagogue and the many organizations that USED to exist. Government was not involved and things worked out very well.

Sadly the cat is out of the bag and never to return.

oh it'll return, ask Greece and Spain.

 

[Gipper]

oh it'll return, ask Greece and Spain.

Yeah you are right...it just won't return in the form that existed before the progressives forced the welfare state on us. This time it will be violent.

 

[dogtowner]

Yeah you are right...it just won't return in the form that existed before the progressives forced the welfare state on us. This time it will be violent.

could be but so was the revolution.

 

[Cruella]

Yeah you are right...it just won't return in the form that existed before the progressives forced the welfare state on us. This time it will be violent.

It's getting pretty bad over there. The Greek police are now sending people to the neo-Nazi party for protection, from the muslim immigrants. Their high unemployment and austerity programs are being complicated by unchecked immigration. Sounds like the place is a powder keg.

 

[Johnny Tremain]

OK, first one is pretty general, but not something most of us would oppose.
No, there's no need to end food stamps and unemployment. The former is as much a subsidy for agriculture as it is welfare. The latter is not welfare, but an insurance plan that workers and employers pay into.
Provide food, from food banks rather than food stamps - now there's a good idea.

It all goes back to basing the programs locally--under states and NOT--NOT--the Federal government.
Send a dollar to Washington--and ten cents comes back with Draconian rules.
The other 90 cents overpays a bunch of ultra-liberal govt. union mooches far too much to do little or nothing but extravagant conventions.

You MUST deprive Washington of dollars to EVER control spending.
There is absolutely no other way. None. Nada. Zippo. Never happen. Period--drop dead.

 

[PLC1]

Yes there is... It's immoral. One person's misfortunes are not a legitimate claim to the fortunes of others.

Unemployment is an insurance paid for by workers and their employers, it is not welfare.
Food stamps are as much a benefit to the producers and distributors of food as to the poor.

But, the food stamp program could be replaced with a commodities plan and save a ton of money.

 

[Cruella]

employees don't pay for unemployment insurance. It's a state and federal tax on the employer, based on their experience rating. California's starts around 7% and federal is 1% of the first $7000 of earnings. This really should be adjusted annually to meet the changes in unemployment.

 

[PLC1]

employees don't pay for unemployment insurance. It's a state and federal tax on the employer, based on their experience rating. California's starts around 7% and federal is 1% of the first $7000 of earnings. This really should be adjusted annually to meet the changes in unemployment.

Yes, it should.
If it is an insurance plan paid for by the employer, then it's a part of the compensation package for workers. It's still not welfare.

If a farmer has a sheep dog who just sits by the fire when there are no sheep to herd, then that dog still gets fed and taken care of. If a worker has no work, doesn't he deserve at least as much as the sheep dog?

 

[Cruella]

Yes, it should.
If it is an insurance plan paid for by the employer, then it's a part of the compensation package for workers. It's still not welfare.

If a farmer has a sheep dog who just sits by the fire when there are no sheep to herd, then that dog still gets fed and taken care of. If a worker has no work, doesn't he deserve at least as much as the sheep dog?

I think there should be unemployment insurance/tax. It can be lowered on the employer if he has a good experience rating, meaning he doesn't have a high turnover. Another thing a lot of people don't understand, is you can only get unemployment if you were let go through no fault of your own. If your fired, forget collecting, unless you can prove it was a wrongful termination. I've had to go to labor realations board hearings on behalf of my employer.

 

[GenSeneca]

Unemployment is an insurance paid for by workers and their employers, it is not welfare.

Unemployment "insurance" is not insurance, it's not voluntary it's mandatory, and it's run by the state not a private institution. Like it or not, it is welfare. The money you're forced to put into it is being redistributed to the people collecting unemployment. It's not "insurance" it's another government run system for the redistribution of wealth.

A savings or investment account would be legitimate unemployment insurance. You could voluntarily allocate the same 3% of your income to such an account, your money grows, you control the account, and any money you draw from the account is your own. The money in such an account hasn't been forcibly redistributed to you at the expense of someone else and the state doesn't control it. That would be moral.

Food stamps are as much a benefit to the producers and distributors of food as to the poor.

At whose expense? The taxpayer.... No man's need gives him a right to the products of another man's labor. To claim otherwise is to support slavery. If I see a homeless man in the street, he has no right to take from me whatever he needs to survive, if he did so it would be theft. If I gave it to him of my own volition it would be charity. When the state forces me to give the man whatever he needs it's slavery.

But, the food stamp program could be replaced with a commodities plan and save a ton of money.

It should be replaced with private charity, that would be the moral thing to do, and that would save taxpayers a great deal of money.