Social Security disability insolvency?

Reba said:
What about the healthy living ones? Certainly there must be a few? If we can get them to support their families, then there will be more resources available for the truly destitute.
Click to expand...

:dunno:

there's a family court for them to deal with it. Steinhauer's posts concern me because he's implying that we should not be "rewarding" them for not working and it's not like single moms are not working on purpose.
 
Jiro said:
:dunno:

there's a family court for them to deal with it. Steinhauer's posts concern me because he's implying that we should not be "rewarding" them for not working and it's not like single moms are not working on purpose.
Click to expand...

some of them don't work on purpose. You are implying that no one takes advantage of the system.
 
Steinhauer said:
Well, we are in a better situation than we were then.
Click to expand...

I don't see as better situation but say different situation is best answer for me because our country need more work, even more reform under progressive group to make right thing in direction.

I'm progressive and strongly disagree with most views that GOP and Tea Party provided, even some of your post about blame on Obama for condition of economy. The 2007-2008 financial crisis wasn't from Obama but it caused by many things, even the congresses are one of them.

Do you want Bush to win the 3rd term? For me, I wish it was and it will put you into different direction if economy goes worse and skyrocket in national debt. It means blaming on president is nowhere because you will get same effect.
 
Steinhauer said:
I didn't know there was a difference.

edit: I think I get it - she was a single mom to three kids, but the circumstances as to how she became a single mom were because she was widowed.
Click to expand...
A widowed or divorced mother was married when she had her children.

A single mother was not married when she had her children.

That's the difference.

Your grandmother was a widowed mother of three, not a single mother.

My mom was a divorced mother of two.
 
Foxrac said:
I don't see as better situation but say different situation is best answer for me because our country need more work, even more reform under progressive group to make right thing in direction.

I'm progressive and strongly disagree with most views that GOP and Tea Party provided, even some of your post about blame on Obama for condition of economy. The 2007-2008 financial crisis wasn't from Obama but it caused by many things, even the congresses are one of them.

Do you want Bush to win the 3rd term? For me, I wish it was and it will put you into different direction if economy goes worse and skyrocket in national debt. It means blaming on president is nowhere because you will get same effect.
Click to expand...

Unemployment skyrocketed under the current administration. Even hard core leftist Democrats are blasting Obama for neglecting this problem. His wealth distribution programs, healthcare reform and failed stimulus programs are just as much a contributing factor to our national economic problems as anything prior.

For Obama to claim he "inherited" the problem is simply political posturing and nothing at all what a strong leader should claim. Every single President in our Nation's history has "inherited" problems from the previous administration. The difference between a strong leader, and a politician, is that a leader will actually try and solve these problems instead of shifting blame.

What it really boils down to - and this is just my opinion - is that anything worth something loses its value when given away freely. Suppose College Degrees were free and you did not have to earn them - would they then lose their value? It is the same thing with money - you should earn it.
 
Reba said:
A widowed or divorced mother was married when she had her children.

A single mother was not married when she had her children.

That's the difference.

Your grandmother was a widowed mother of three, not a single mother.

My mom was a divorced mother of two.
Click to expand...

Ah ... I get it. Thanks for the correction.
 
Steinhauer said:
some of them don't work on purpose. You are implying that no one takes advantage of the system.
Click to expand...
don't be naive.

no I don't imply such thing and you should know better. It's called common sense. It's obvious that we would not be having unemployment benefit program if the frauds outnumbered legitimated cases.

I'll ask you straight and you better give it to me straight too. No dancing around. No funny talk.

Do you want to abolish unemployment benefits? yes or no?
 
Jiro said:
don't be naive.

no I don't imply such thing and you should know better. It's called common sense. It's obvious that we would not be having unemployment benefit program if the frauds outnumbered legitimated cases.

I'll ask you straight and you better give it to me straight too. No dancing around. No funny talk.

Do you want to abolish unemployment benefits? yes or no?
Click to expand...

For people who take advantage of the system? Yes.

For people who can work but refuse to because it is not their dream job? Yes.

Having talked with my grandmother about how she survived the Great Depression, she said people had a different mentality then. Mopping floors was seen as an opportunity - it was not looked down on.

It is the perspective on work that has changed over the years.
 
Steinhauer said:
For people who take advantage of the system? Yes.

For people who can work but refuse to because it is not their dream job? Yes.

Having talked with my grandmother about how she survived the Great Depression, she said people had a different mentality then. Mopping floors was seen as an opportunity - it was not looked down on.

It is the perspective on work that has changed over the years.
Click to expand...

you could have just simply answered my question with 1-word answer - "yes" :roll:
 
Jiro said:
you could have just simply answered my question with 1-word answer - "yes" :roll:
Click to expand...

No, because that would be playing your "game". And we both know you like to play this game.

Those benefits are there for people who NEED them. Not for people who can actually be working but don't want to.
 
Steinhauer said:
I think I can understand why


(currently writing an apology to my grandmother - I may have inadvertently offended her ;) )
Click to expand...

just a little tip - try not to reinvent definition of words to fit your view on issues. it's much less confusing that way.
 
Steinhauer said:
No, because that would be playing your "game". And we both know you like to play this game.

Those benefits are there for people who NEED them. Not for people who can actually be working but don't want to.
Click to expand...

but... you kept bringing up some silly posts like "Maybe she should work like everyone else?" and your grandma example which is not even pertinent to this thread.

Did you know that unemployment benefits depends on people's previous employment and how much they paid in for tax? Too little tax... they get little unemployment benefits. That's why they're in poverty.

Do you really think bums and scammers can collect enough to buy big-screen tvs and X-Box?
 
Steinhauer said:
Unemployment skyrocketed under the current administration. Even hard core leftist Democrats are blasting Obama for neglecting this problem. His wealth distribution programs, healthcare reform and failed stimulus programs are just as much a contributing factor to our national economic problems as anything prior.

For Obama to claim he "inherited" the problem is simply political posturing and nothing at all what a strong leader should claim. Every single President in our Nation's history has "inherited" problems from the previous administration. The difference between a strong leader, and a politician, is that a leader will actually try and solve these problems instead of shifting blame.

What it really boils down to - and this is just my opinion - is that anything worth something loses its value when given away freely. Suppose College Degrees were free and you did not have to earn them - would they then lose their value? It is the same thing with money - you should earn it.
Click to expand...

Same goes with Bush Admin too and there was stimulus package under Bush Admin in 2008 that where we got money via direct deposit or via in mail.

Politicians think that stimulus package will be solution for financial crisis and it doesn't work on all situations. Both of Bush Admin and Obama Admin are EPIC FAIL when come to handling with economy. Clinton Admin had stimulus package in early 1990's and it was successful.
 
Steinhauer said:
For people who take advantage of the system? Yes.

For people who can work but refuse to because it is not their dream job? Yes.

Having talked with my grandmother about how she survived the Great Depression, she said people had a different mentality then. Mopping floors was seen as an opportunity - it was not looked down on.

It is the perspective on work that has changed over the years.
Click to expand...

Have you ever been through a SSDI hearing? People who can work but just don't want to? Even people who can't work as shown by numerous medical and rehabilitation records are denied SSDI. It is not easy to get declared permanently disabled by the SSA.
 
Back
Top