23 Mar 13
Originally posted by EladarGiving away stuff, whether food or money results in both fraud and violence. Bad outcomes in general. The recipient is always degraded and never thinks it is enough. The money or goods always end up in somewhat the wrong hands. The goods may not meet the needs of the actual people, so they are exchanged, for example food stamps for cash, to buy either drugs or diapers.
People sell their food stamps for money to spend on other things. That's what I meant by fraud.
The incentives of giveaways are diabolical.
23 Mar 13
Originally posted by normbenignYeah, that's true, can't step a foot outside without a group of thugs ganging up on me and beating me up. All that damn violence here!
Giving away stuff, whether food or money results in both fraud and violence. Bad outcomes in general. The recipient is always degraded and never thinks it is enough. The money or goods always end up in somewhat the wrong hands. The goods may not meet the needs of the actual people, so they are exchanged, for example food stamps for cash, to buy either drugs or diapers.
The incentives of giveaways are diabolical.
23 Mar 13
Originally posted by KazetNagorraWhether it is fraud or force depends on the particular culture. In Somalia, giving away food was an invitation to the warlords to steal the food, for later sale to people.
Yeah, that's true, can't step a foot outside without a group of thugs ganging up on me and beating me up. All that damn violence here!
Force and fraud are just two sides of the same coin.
23 Mar 13
Perhaps the agenda implied in the thread - that the poor can only be fed through hand-outs and/or that their own lack of effort has led to their indigence - is false. Our society presents it's members with copious financial pressures few of which are to do with food, food's fairly cheap and really not the problem, one needs fuel, rent, Council Tax (in the UK) and to cover debt repayments. So the poor need money, food handouts - except in emergency cases - really doesn't cut it. Fundamentally the poor need decently paid work so they can support themselves, and if in work to be payed a sufficient amount to live. The real question then is why does our society appear to require a surplus army of labour?
23 Mar 13
Originally posted by normbenignSo you think fraud is a particularly severe problem in Finland? What data do you base this on?
Whether it is fraud or force depends on the particular culture. In Somalia, giving away food was an invitation to the warlords to steal the food, for later sale to people.
Force and fraud are just two sides of the same coin.
23 Mar 13
Originally posted by DeepThoughtCan only be fed? Really is that what you read? How pathetic.
Perhaps the agenda implied in the thread - that the poor can only be fed through hand-outs and/or that their own lack of effort has led to their indigence - is false. Our society presents it's members with copious financial pressures few of which are to do with food, food's fairly cheap and really not the problem, one needs fuel, rent, Council Tax (in t ...[text shortened]... . The real question then is why does our society appear to require a surplus army of labour?
I said should because of fraud and abuse.
If there were jobs that the poor could get, then would you support a 'if you don't work then you don't eat' policy?
23 Mar 13
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI don't know why you would bring Finland into my comments. I have little knowledge of Finland and admit it.
So you think fraud is a particularly severe problem in Finland? What data do you base this on?
My comments were general, and to whatever extent they don't apply in Finland, they do in most of the rest of the world.
23 Mar 13
Originally posted by EladarThe frauds you seemed to be referring to were to do with food stamps being sold on, this is caused by giving them food stamps instead of cash. If the frauds you refer to include claiming while having an income, then the mode by which you give the benefit is hardly the issue.
Can only be fed? Really is that what you read? How pathetic.
I said should because of fraud and abuse.
If there were jobs that the poor could get, then would you support a 'if you don't work then you don't eat' policy?
Do we have full employment? You want to have your cake and eat it with the last one, since there are always some jobs available, but far more people unemployed.
23 Mar 13
Originally posted by normbenignAlright, on what data do you base your "general" conclusions about violence and fraud then?
I don't know why you would bring Finland into my comments. I have little knowledge of Finland and admit it.
My comments were general, and to whatever extent they don't apply in Finland, they do in most of the rest of the world.
23 Mar 13
Originally posted by JS357Yes other than doing it for basic survival it is a career choice, gets a bit more complicated when it is done to feed an addiction.
OK, I get it. Such disparate power is injustice, agreed, if one side can starve the other and the other side can only submit or starve.
24 Mar 13
Originally posted by EladarThat would be so much more expensive and bureaucratic, though in general such as with food warehouses I think it would ok to give food in addition ot monetary help.
No, I mean give them food.
Government run restraunts where the poor can go and get something to eat. Sounds great to me.
I suppose it could be near government run apartments so that they can have a place to live.
The original post just comes idiotic and naive, however. Sorry.
24 Mar 13
Originally posted by normbenignWhile anecdotal, I know many people on food stamps and they spend it all on food. The $ is very small. They have to spend all of it on food so that them and their kids avoid starving. Your characterization is unjustly negative and way overblown. Exposes your stupid fringe bias. You really are an idiot. I am glad you are old and won't be around much longer.
Giving away stuff, whether food or money results in both fraud and violence. Bad outcomes in general. The recipient is always degraded and never thinks it is enough. The money or goods always end up in somewhat the wrong hands. The goods may not meet the needs of the actual people, so they are exchanged, for example food stamps for cash, to buy either drugs or diapers.
The incentives of giveaways are diabolical.
24 Mar 13
Originally posted by EladarYou could combine the two and call it, oh I dunno, a Workhouse?
No, I mean give them food.
Government run restraunts where the poor can go and get something to eat. Sounds great to me.
I suppose it could be near government run apartments so that they can have a place to live.
25 Mar 13
Originally posted by moon1969"Exposes your stupid fringe bias. You really are an idiot."
While anecdotal, I know many people on food stamps and they spend it all on food. The $ is very small. They have to spend all of it on food so that them and their kids avoid starving. Your characterization is unjustly negative and way overblown. Exposes your stupid fringe bias. You really are an idiot. I am glad you are old and won't be around much longer.
Glad to see your typical liberal tolerance and diversity on display. By the way, I'm in excellent health, and expect to annoy you for many years to come.