All Forums | General Discussion

I really don't understand how Democrats think are economy is doing good

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2442
Posts: 68
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 6180
Posted: #26
Manila - If you have a good sob story, a minority and have 3-6 kids with no daddy, dear gov will pick up the entire tab...
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 27139
Posted: #27
You know you're poor when you're jealous of people on welfare. 
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2002
Posts: 54719
Posted: #28
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox:

You know you're poor when you're jealous of people on welfare. 
Its not jealousy, its disgust. Some people put on their work boots 5 days a week and put in 40+ hours. Some people roll out of bed at 2pm, slip on their flip flops and walk to the mail box once a month....

See the difference? Wonder why there is contempt?  
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 27139
Posted: #29
Ok, let's use Killer B's example. A lady has 6 kids and there's no responsible male in the picture. How does Train69 deal with that situation? Do you think the kids should live in a cave in the woods and live off of berries? 

Typical response is - she shouldn't have had six kids if she can't support them. 

But she does. 

So, how would Train69 deal with this situation? 

-popcorn- 
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2003
Posts: 32184
Posted: #30
Quote Originally Posted by Manila_Playa87:

A third of Americans unemployed is insane and at the same time catastrophic.

I'm curious to know how much welfare an unemployed single person gets in the US since I'm not from there. Does it vary state by state?

In Australia it's $1030 a month. America from what I hear is quite harsh if you're down and out on luck.



I have no first hand knowledge but (since no one else is answering your question) it's my understanding that there is a cap of about $650 a month maximum unemployment monthly benefit based on what a person actually earned over the last 12 months.  Not exactly the lap of luxury.  It does vary from State to State and it may be different in Australia but people in the States can also file for extended time.

Health Coverage is considered a separate benefit and the unemployed can also file for Health benefits based on their unemployment because most Americans carry Health Insurance through their employers Group Plan.
~~~~~ZOSO~~~~~
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2001
Posts: 5557
Posted: #31
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox:

Ok, let's use Killer B's example. A lady has 6 kids and there's no responsible male in the picture. How does Train69 deal with that situation? Do you think the kids should live in a cave in the woods and live off of berries? 

Typical response is - she shouldn't have had six kids if she can't support them. 

But she does. 

So, how would Train69 deal with this situation? 

-popcorn- 

 

Yes, I'd like to hear the answer to your question too. 

She has 6 children and her boyfriend/husband is probably in jail for non child support.

I think his answer will be... Just take them out and shoot them with his new AR15.

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 34015
Posted: #32
Quote Originally Posted by don juan:

Yes, I'd like to hear the answer to your question too. 

She has 6 children and her boyfriend/husband is probably in jail for non child support.

I think his answer will be... Just take them out and shoot them with his new AR15.

More than likely the reason the boyfriend/ ex-husband can't pay child support is because he can't find a job in Obama's America..

Obama is running America like the people In Baltimore are running that city ..entitlements for votes..

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2009
Posts: 5751
Posted: #33
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox:

Ok, let's use Killer B's example. A lady has 6 kids and there's no responsible male in the picture. How does Train69 deal with that situation? Do you think the kids should live in a cave in the woods and live off of berries? 

Typical response is - she shouldn't have had six kids if she can't support them. 

But she does. 

So, how would Train69 deal with this situation? 

-popcorn- 

If the father isn't taking care of his kids then garnish his wages, assuming he has a job and he's not in prison.

Make sure the mother works. No free checks. If she has the kid then what's done is done, the kid will be taken care of, but by making that decision she has to work. If it means flipping burgers or picking up trash on the side of the road then she's going to wake up every morning and go to work.

Let's say she can't wake her lazy azz up and go to work or keep a job for more than a month. I have a contingency plan. Do you want a kid growing up in that environment? Me neither. Take the kid away. I say build kid friendly compounds where they get 3 meals a day, an education, and can participate in activities.

The above is an example of an investment. What is going on right now is a continuous cycle of women (welfare-kids-welfare) and men (welfare-crime-prison). Get kids out of that environment and their lives will improve. The money the local, state, and fed govts save on welfare will go to this.

If the mother is still not working and she has another kid with another man then I say tie her fukkin tubes. I say hit her with a tranquilizer dart, throw a net over her, and drag her azz into a clinic. When she awakens try and convince her to commit suicide. I'm against governments rounding people up and killing them but if they kill themselves then so be it. I know assisted suicide proponents are with me on this.

I hope when everyone was reading that you were picturing white people since we all know there are more white people on welfare and it would be totally un-racists to get rid of welfare.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2001
Posts: 5557
Posted: #34
Quote Originally Posted by canovsp:

If the father isn't taking care of his kids then garnish his wages, assuming he has a job and he's not in prison.

Make sure the mother works. No free checks. If she has the kid then what's done is done, the kid will be taken care of, but by making that decision she has to work. If it means flipping burgers or picking up trash on the side of the road then she's going to wake up every morning and go to work.

Let's say she can't wake her lazy azz up and go to work or keep a job for more than a month. I have a contingency plan. Do you want a kid growing up in that environment? Me neither. Take the kid away. I say build kid friendly compounds where they get 3 meals a day, an education, and can participate in activities.

The above is an example of an investment. What is going on right now is a continuous cycle of women (welfare-kids-welfare) and men (welfare-crime-prison). Get kids out of that environment and their lives will improve. The money the local, state, and fed govts save on welfare will go to this.

If the mother is still not working and she has another kid with another man then I say tie her fukkin tubes. I say hit her with a tranquilizer dart, throw a net over her, and drag her azz into a clinic. When she awakens try and convince her to commit suicide. I'm against governments rounding people up and killing them but if they kill themselves then so be it. I know assisted suicide proponents are with me on this.

I hope when everyone was reading that you were picturing white people since we all know there are more white people on welfare and it would be totally un-racists to get rid of welfare.

 

You are a typical right-wing nut.. I remember a fella in Berlin during WW11 who had the same mindset >

Sicko's  

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2009
Posts: 2235
Posted: #35
Quote Originally Posted by don juan:

 

You are a typical right-wing nut.. I remember a fella in Berlin during WW11 who had the same mindset >

Sicko's  

So the responsible should pay for the mistakes of others? There is no reason to have 6 kids if you can't take care of them, None. The assisted suicide might go a little overboard, but I would be for forcing them to get their tubes tied/vasectomy.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2009
Posts: 5751
Posted: #36
Quote Originally Posted by don juan:

 

You are a typical right-wing nut.. I remember a fella in Berlin during WW11 who had the same mindset >

Sicko's  

At least you agree with the other parts.

Baby steps.

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2012
Posts: 2049
Posted: #37
How about pay them not to have kids?  Actually saves money in the long run and eventually eliminates these evolutionary dead ends that are artificially being rewarded.  Surely there would be bugs to work out because we don't want no one having kids but the idea is much more sound than the current policies
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #38

If the father isn't taking care of his kids then garnish his wages, assuming he has a job and he's not in prison.

assuming he has a job and assuming it is one with a real paycheck, how does this happen?

Make sure the mother works. No free checks. If she has the kid then what's done is done, the kid will be taken care of, but by making that decision she has to work. If it means flipping burgers or picking up trash on the side of the road then she's going to wake up every morning and go to work.

what is the 2 year old going to be doing while she's working 8-12 hours a day to try and make ends meet?

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2012
Posts: 2049
Posted: #39
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:

If the father isn't taking care of his kids then garnish his wages, assuming he has a job and he's not in prison.

assuming he has a job and assuming it is one with a real paycheck, how does this happen?

Make sure the mother works. No free checks. If she has the kid then what's done is done, the kid will be taken care of, but by making that decision she has to work. If it means flipping burgers or picking up trash on the side of the road then she's going to wake up every morning and go to work.

what is the 2 year old going to be doing while she's working 8-12 hours a day to try and make ends meet?



If it's a real paycheck an the government knows his social security number owes child support and takes it from the check just like social security
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #40
Quote Originally Posted by thecentaur:



If it's a real paycheck an the government knows his social security number owes child support and takes it from the check just like social security



one other assumption, the guy can be found.  but if he can be found and he has a job and he has a real paycheck, how do you get to the point where the government garnishes his wages?

i think the answer is that she has to pay to hire a lawyer and the have to file child support paperwork and/or garnishment paperwork with the court and they have to pay to have someone serve the dad and they have to prove he is the father and they have to prove that he can afford a certain amount in child support and then the judge has to issue an order. 

when the guy quits his job or gets fired in a month, she needs to pay to do part of this over again.  and so on.

so, it's easy to say, we'll just garnish his wages, but we can't just snap our fingers and make it happen.  it costs money and has to go through the family courts and so on.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 1168
Posted: #41
Quote Originally Posted by bettingforfun:

I have yet to have a President dictate what kind of income I could make.  It's all about taking responsibility for your OWN life and making it happen.  There are roadblocks all throughout life and people just need to learn how to maneuver around them.

Plenty of jobs where I am at, you just need to have the urge to work. Way to many people in this country want to complain and not look for ways to make things happen.  If you don't like your job start your own business.  Take pride in the life you lead.  You don't have to love what you do but you should take care of yourself and not leave it up to other people.  People fall on bad times but after awhile it becomes time to pull yourself up.  

People, get off your a$$, get a job and start being an asset to this country by paying your own way.

Agree 100%. People sit on a couch  thinking  they're entitled to make a certain amount of money without actually  doing the work to make the money. There's no politician in Washington that's going to do anything for you EVER-bottom line. You've got to find a way to go out & hustle a living every single week-ON YOUR OWN. Nobody does anything for anybody. There's plenty of money to be made-if you're willing to work 12-14 hours a day to earn it. Get off the couch & go grab it.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 27139
Posted: #42
Moms working 8-12 hours a day.. Who is taking care of the 6 kids? She's working at Walmart 50 hours a week taking home 325.00. 325 x 4 =1300.. Rent for a family of 7 = 1500... Hmm, looks like you have a few obstacles to overcome.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 27139
Posted: #43
The US is going to spend trillions fighting a pointless war in the Middle East and take kids away from mothers that can't afford their kids and stick the kids in a "compound".

You sir, are a comedian.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2009
Posts: 5751
Posted: #44

I got the responses I was looking for. It took a little prodding but the libs didn't let me down.

All libs want to do when it comes to economics is redistribute wealth. They don't want welfare recipients to better themselves. They'll make every excuse under the sun to keep them on welfare.

You ask what are the kids going to do when mom's at work?

IT'S NOT MY FUKKIN REPONSIBILITY WHAT THEY DO! IT'S THEIRS. SEND THE KIDS TO GRAM MAWMAW'S. SEND THEM TO DAYCARE!

Libs want the govt to stay out of people's bedrooms. I agree with that. I think they should stay out of the whole fukkin house! Let the individuals of the house decide what they're going to do and how they're going to get it done.

(Handshake)

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2009
Posts: 2235
Posted: #45
Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox:

Moms working 8-12 hours a day.. Who is taking care of the 6 kids? She's working at Walmart 50 hours a week taking home 325.00. 325 x 4 =1300.. Rent for a family of 7 = 1500... Hmm, looks like you have a few obstacles to overcome.
It's pretty apparent she doesn't give a sh*t about her kids, if she has 6 and realized she couldn't take care of one let alone six on a walmart salary. It should be criminal
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2009
Posts: 5751
Posted: #46

Quote Originally Posted by I_Need_A_Detox:

The US is going to spend trillions fighting a pointless war in the Middle East and take kids away from mothers that can't afford their kids and stick the kids in a "compound".

You sir, are a comedian.

I'll concede we should stop spending taxpayer money in the Middle East.

Will you concede we should stop spending taxpayer money on welfare?

 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #47

You ask what are the kids going to do when mom's at work?

IT'S NOT MY FUKKIN REPONSIBILITY WHAT THEY DO! IT'S THEIRS. SEND THE KIDS TO GRAM MAWMAW'S. SEND THEM TO DAYCARE!


we should send them to free daycare or the never ending supply of grandmas who are alive, available, ready and willing to watch infants 10 hours a day.  that should do it.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2009
Posts: 5751
Posted: #48

Quote Originally Posted by bill702:

It's pretty apparent she doesn't give a sh*t about her kids, if she has 6 and realized she couldn't take care of one let alone six on a walmart salary. It should be criminal

Exactly Bill. That post I made a few posts ago was in jest to what the essence of the argument is and you nailed it.

If some ho is gonna have six kids with no way to take care of them then she doesn't give a sh*t about them.

Taking a check from the govt doesn't equate to caring for your children. The kids would be better off being raised by a pack of wolves.

Let's make a reality show where we follow a mother around with numerous illegitimate kids. Twenty years later let's revisit that mother and see where the kids ended up.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2009
Posts: 5751
Posted: #49
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:

You ask what are the kids going to do when mom's at work?

IT'S NOT MY FUKKIN REPONSIBILITY WHAT THEY DO! IT'S THEIRS. SEND THE KIDS TO GRAM MAWMAW'S. SEND THEM TO DAYCARE!


we should send them to free daycare or the never ending supply of grandmas who are alive, available, ready and willing to watch infants 10 hours a day.  that should do it.

You must have missed the part when I said

IT'S NOT MY FUKKIN RESPONSIBILITY! I DON'T GIVE A DAMN.

I'll take care of my family and friends when they need help.

If you care so much what are you going to do? As an individual, what are you willing to sacrifice to help out someone you don't know?

 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2012
Posts: 2049
Posted: #50
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:


we should send them to free daycare or the never ending supply of grandmas who are alive, available, ready and willing to watch infants 10 hours a day. 



Well most of the grandmas in these situations are under 40 so they a most likely still alive
All Forums | General Discussion
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2025 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.