Violent Protests in Baltimore

[cooleddie74]

Destigmatizing the act of simply receiving welfare benefits is a big first step if not the most important one.

The War on Poverty has been turned into a War on Dignity by many politicians who seemingly grew up in an America where if you had to use, say, Food Stamps at any point you were clearly a dysfunctional failure who didn't do something right. And those politicians took that and ran with it, using it as a nasty cudgel on their path to public office because they know that more than a few of their fellow Americans agree with them about people on welfare being leeches and losers.

If we could just get a significant chunk of our population to stop regarding most welfare recipients as complete and total losers who are sucking up their tax money and making the country worse (when corporate welfare and subsidies to big business are much more inexcusable and often larger) it would be the biggest advance in fighting poverty since Lyndon Johnson was President.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

So make the discussion even-handed.
How do we "end the War on Poverty" without destroying safety nets and while making sure people are fed and educated?

We don't end the war on poverty.

As I noticed earlier, we aren't even fighting a War on Poverty anymore. Instead, it's become a war on poor people.

Then the dialogue needs to be changed, it seems. "Fight the War on [cause]" is good for a soundbite, but what does it really do? What about arguing for thoughtfully helping people in need?
ETA: To cooleddie, that's a start!

 

[cooleddie74]

Sadly we're in an age where more people get upset that a mother with kids is on Food Stamps and just bought a steak with them than they are about billions of dollars going into corporate subsidies or being "lost" without a trace on overseas contracts in places like Iraq. Because, I don't know, 'Murica™ or something.

The guy getting welfare is apparently a bigger threat to American national security and the future of our democracy than elected leaders who are in the pockets of lobbyists and special interest groups and funnel billions into those same pockets. The working poor are stigmatized. The crooks with yachts and bank accounts in foreign countries are rewarded.

 

[Timby]

Destigmatizing the act of simply receiving welfare benefits is a big first step if not the most important one.

Case in point: Wisconsin lawmaker proposes bill to tell grown adults what they can and cannot purchase with food stamps.

 

[Jedi_Master]

This is the part that gets lost in all the talk of "idiots" rioting and whatnot.

Freddie Gray was perfectly fine at the moment of his arrest, when he was put into that van.

When he left that van, his neck was broken and his larynx was crushed.

This. A group of citizens committed an act of violence against another citizen. That's a crime, right?

 

[Robert Maxwell]

This is the part that gets lost in all the talk of "idiots" rioting and whatnot.

Freddie Gray was perfectly fine at the moment of his arrest, when he was put into that van.

When he left that van, his neck was broken and his larynx was crushed.

This. A group of citizens committed an act of violence against another citizen. That's a crime, right?

Not when the police do it, apparently.

 

[BillJ]

I think this statement from the article I linked says it all:

He added: “[Residents] fear the police more than they fear the drug dealers on the corner.”

 

[cooleddie74]

And I think the state legislatures in both Kansas and Missouri have also tried to get away with similar new rules to dictate Food Stamp usage. One of them (Kansas) may even have succeeded since the Governor is a Republican.

 

[Tiger Devil Dog]

Destigmatizing the act of simply receiving welfare benefits is a big first step if not the most important one.

Case in point: Wisconsin lawmaker proposes bill to tell grown adults what they can and cannot purchase with food stamps.

Why should people on food stamps be able to purchase whatever they want with them? It's not their money, it's the taxpayers money.

 

[mos6507]

So you'll only stand up for justice when black people choose a martyr that meets your standards.

Justice? Like the cheering (some) blacks did over the OJ verdict? Just because some people get upset doesn't mean their definition of justice is invariably the correct one. I also don't think rioting helps the cause. It only reinforces negative stereotypes that minorities or the poor are prone to destructive behavior.

 

[BillJ]

I also don't think rioting helps the cause. It only reinforces negative stereotypes that minorities or the poor are prone to destructive behavior.

You mean the stereotypes that we've created to make us feel good about keeping this group of people down?

 

[cooleddie74]

We're not talking about tattoos or cigarettes or visits to strip clubs. If a mother wants to buy a steak for her kids because they want a steak (and it's food) then that should be their prerogative as a family who wants to eat a steak. If they're not attempting to purchase non-food items with their benefits it's nobody's business but theirs.

 

[Jedi_Master]

This is the part that gets lost in all the talk of "idiots" rioting and whatnot.

Freddie Gray was perfectly fine at the moment of his arrest, when he was put into that van.

When he left that van, his neck was broken and his larynx was crushed.

This. A group of citizens committed an act of violence against another citizen. That's a crime, right?

Not when the police do it, apparently.

That seems to be the truth, yet some people can't understand why that would bother anyone.

The police aren't Jedi Wizard Avengers imbued with mythical knowledge of esoteric forces and super powers - they are regular people with specialized training doing a difficult job with an uncertain mandate.
Cooperating with the police to the best of your ability is a good idea, but treating them like a deity is ridiculous.

 

[Tiger Devil Dog]

We're not talking about tattoos or cigarettes or visits to strip clubs. If a mother wants to buy a steak for her kids because they want a steak (and it's food) then that should be their prerogative as a family who wants to eat a steak. If they're not attempting to purchase non-food items with their benefits it's nobody's business but theirs.

Actually it is the taxpayer's business, because it's the taxpayer's money.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

We're not talking about tattoos or cigarettes or visits to strip clubs. If a mother wants to buy a steak for her kids because they want a steak (and it's food) then that should be their prerogative as a family who wants to eat a steak. If they're not attempting to purchase non-food items with their benefits it's nobody's business but theirs.

Actually it is the taxpayer's business, because it's the taxpayer's money.

Too bad taxpayers don't seem to care much when their/our money is used to pay out, y'know, multi-million dollar police brutality settlements.

Somebody should probably put a stop to all those abusive cops, you think?

 

[BillJ]

Actually it is the taxpayer's business, because it's the taxpayer's money.

No it isn't. You use taxpayer money everyday when you use the roads. Does the government have the right to get into your financial business because of that?

If you meet the requirements of assistance, then you get it. Managing financial affairs is a persons private business.

 

[cooleddie74]

Actually it is the taxpayer's business, because it's the taxpayer's money.

Not to that extent it shouldn't be. Not unless the taxpayers also get to dictate which lobbyists, corporations and foreign governments get our money and precisely how it's used and then punish them all when they do the exact opposite.

Tit for tat. If the working poor have to follow stricter rules then so should everybody else getting handouts from the government. But that won't happen because Freedom™ or something.

 

[Jedi_Master]

That's an untenable position Tiger Devil Dog.
The limit of a taxpayer's hypothetical power would be to decide how the government spends tax dollars, not how recipients of government funds spend money. Even that level of control is impossible to achieve.

 

[Tiger Devil Dog]

Too bad taxpayers don't seem to care much when their/our money is used to pay out, y'know, multi-million dollar police brutality settlements.

Somebody should probably put a stop to all those abusive cops, you think?

I've already stated that ending the War on Drugs would do wonders to ending police brutality. I don't know what else you want me to say. If you have any suggestions I'm all ears.

 

[BillJ]

Too bad taxpayers don't seem to care much when their/our money is used to pay out, y'know, multi-million dollar police brutality settlements.

Somebody should probably put a stop to all those abusive cops, you think?

I've already stated that ending the War on Drugs would do wonders to ending police brutality. I don't know what else you want me to say. If you have any suggestions I'm all ears.

But that has nothing to do with what is being talked about. You want to micromanage the poor because they use taxpayer money but don't seem to have the same standard for yourself or government entities.