*Small Rant* This feels unfair...

Why does getting aid for disability in the US require that one lists all of their resources, but if someone is pregnant, has a child under 21 or is under 21 themselves, they don't have to list resources? Plus I've seen an old neighbor get WIC for a son who lives with them along with his girlfriend and their baby, but these neighbors have a car, 6-7 acres, and a big house, but I have no car, live in an apartment, and barely have anything (sometimes I don't even get enough to eat) but yet they live like kings yet and still got WIC.

Why do breeders always claim they never get enough? Yet if you are legit disabled or have no children, you are put through more hoops then they do, to get less stuff then they do.

Because it IS unfair. Breeders soak up all the resources, and leave nothing for those who truly need it, such as people who suffer with disabilities. They are held to a lower standard as far as assets are concerned, and I wonder how much of that is to punish CF or CL people for not doing their due diligence by sluicing a kid?

The truly unfair part is that I'm suspecting that CL and CF people put way more into that pool of resources than breeders do. We get little or nothing to show for it, because hey, it's OUR responsibility to care for the next generation. Even though we don't want any part of it.

I'm sorry to hear you are going through this. I'm assuming you live in the States, and I'm in Canada. I was on disability for awhile because I was misdiagnosed and drugged up for mental illnesses I didn't have. The drugs gave me side effects that made it impossible to hold meaningful employment. I did get a subsidized apartment and a cheap bus pass, basic medical care and a small amount of money. I usually wound up hungry, because I was unable to pay my bills and buy food at the same time. I know that if I'd have sluiced a brat or two, I would have qualified for a larger place and more benefits...even though sluicing is a fucking lifestyle CHOICE.

I obviously chose not to have any. Now I'm married and own a house. I'm a student and I'm finally learning to drive. I'm very close to finishing my course, and I've managed to get off of all my psych meds, despite months of horrible withdrawals.

You can live better in the US being a willfully unemployed breeder than you ever could working most jobs. You crap out a kid and you can have everything given to you on a platter: food stamps, free housing, free money, free medical care, sometimes free cars and free kid stuff like diapers and formula. Then most breeders can probably figure out some bullshit disability they can claim in order to get more free money.

Meanwhile, if you recognize that you're too poor to raise a child and work like a normal person, you might not even be able to afford the basics.

I have friends on the dole and they live like royalty all at absolutely no cost to them. Free spacious apartment, free money, free food, and for the ones with brats, even more free money. They use their free money to buy fancy shit like computers, cameras, professional hair treatments, expensive food, and some even use it to take vacations!

Compare to friends who are not on the dole: living paycheck to paycheck, going without, needing to turn the heat almost entirely off in winter, being unable to eat sometimes, living at home with parents, and going without medical treatment for both minor and major issues because they have no insurance or crappy insurance. Some have even had to turn to theft/shoplifting in order to have food or simple necessities like toilet paper.

---

I'm absolutely all for welfare when it's needed, even if it's long-term because sometimes you either can't find a job or don't make enough at a job. It's when I have to lose a chunk of my paycheck so lazy fucks can sit on their asses 24/7 that makes me have problems. I think if you have a brat while on the dole, you shouldn't receive more money for it. You live in a two-person home and get benefits for two, then you figure the fuck out how to make it work for three if you decide to have a kid while leeching off other people's money.

I'd like to see less given to breeders and more given to people who work and don't make enough or who can't work due to legitimate reasons and not because baybee. I would much rather see the money taken out of my check going to someone who can't work or who can't live off their income than to someone who considers popping out an annual loaf their "job."

Quote
nightfire
Why does getting aid for disability in the US require that one lists all of their resources, but if someone is pregnant, has a child under 21 or is under 21 themselves, they don't have to list resources?

In my state, people who apply for welfare must list all their household resources and income in my state, and they have to turn over any child support to the state. They also can stay on welfare for only five years. Is that different in your state?

Quote
quiltergirl

Quote
nightfire
Why does getting aid for disability in the US require that one lists all of their resources, but if someone is pregnant, has a child under 21 or is under 21 themselves, they don't have to list resources?

In my state, people who apply for welfare must list all their household resources and income in my state, and they have to turn over any child support to the state. They also can stay on welfare for only five years. Is that different in your state?

My former state was similar. I was on Section 8 housing in college, so I applied and received the housing based on my income and that didn't require household resources to be listed out.

I didn't qualify for food stamps, etc. because no kids and the income level for a single to qualify was under minimum wage. A friend of mine with kids had to list out all her resources and I think she had to sell her car to her family (it was old and worth nothing) before she was accepted to the food stamp/welfare program. She could literally have no assets.

This was also the late 90's, so it likely has changed. I thought Clinton reduced welfare benefits and put a cap on the time period they could be collected?

I am disabled but got very lucky because I'm on survivor's benefits and receive 3/4 of my father's pension. I live in specialist housing for the mentally ill, it is basically independent housing with roommates. I just pay $300 for my room, where a typical apartment in my area is $1000.

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!

@Mumofsixbirds

Yes, I am in the States. And Thank you

@quiltergirl

I am on SSI or SSDI ( whatever the one that also allows you to work) so I don't have a limited time period, at least for my situation.

Thank you everyone

I think it is frustrating because the general work income limits of 1,180 a month gross pay haven't been updated for quite a while. They consider Gainful Activity (which seems to have a dollar amount apparently) and if you go above that income limit, (even simply through a raise if nothing else) then it becomes Significant or Substantial Gainful Activity and you thus are no longer considered 'disabled' (and can lose your disability payments.)

As for someone having kids as poor to get welfare, I had read an article on someone who did just that. It was a young woman in the US who was poor and going hungry and could barely survive on what she had. I might be remembering wrong, but she might have gotten rejected for welfare or not given enough because she didn't have kids. She didn't actually want kids, but she was very desperate, and she saw all of the food and money and help parents get, that she got knocked up so she could get enough to survive.

I've heard some people on here say that the welfare office people try to tell them to have kids so they'll get more. I think this is sad that even the workers know the pay is not adequate, so they advise people of the main 'method' to get more, even if it only reinforces the brokenness of the system at the end.

Quote
nightfire
I think it is frustrating because the general work income limits of 1,180 a month gross pay haven't been updated for quite a while. They consider Gainful Activity (which seems to have a dollar amount apparently) and if you go above that income limit, (even simply through a raise if nothing else) then it becomes Significant or Substantial Gainful Activity and you thus are no longer considered 'disabled' (and can lose your disability payments.)

As for someone having kids as poor to get welfare, I had read an article on someone who did just that. It was a young woman in the US who was poor and going hungry and could barely survive on what she had. I might be remembering wrong, but she might have gotten rejected for welfare or not given enough because she didn't have kids. She didn't actually want kids, but she was very desperate, and she saw all of the food and money and help parents get, that she got knocked up so she could get enough to survive.

I've heard some people on here say that the welfare office people try to tell them to have kids so they'll get more. I think this is sad that even the workers know the pay is not adequate, so they advise people of the main 'method' to get more, even if it only reinforces the brokenness of the system at the end.

The system is rigged to pretty much force most who need assistance to have at least one kid to gain it. It is obviously in the best interest of the wizard behind the curtain that everyone breeds. And it is not just capitalist countries that are pushing breeding. I don't know of any country where breeding isn't pushed. Does anyone know of one?

And don't forget when the bioethicist suggests that the population breeding be controlled all the Moo screaming starts, and their first suggestion seems to be is that the childfree should be executed. Just so they can continue to breed. Well who caused the problem in the first place

two cents ¢¢

CERTIFIED HOSEHEAD!!!

people (especially women) do not give ONE DAMN about what they inflict on children and I defy anyone to prove me wrong

Dysfunctional relationships almost always have a child. The more dysfunctional, the more children.

The selfish wants of adults outweigh the needs of the child.

Some mistakes cannot be fixed, but some mistakes can be 'fixed'.

People who say they sleep like a baby usually don't have one. Leo J. Burke

Adoption agencies have strict criteria (usually). Breeders, whose combined IQ's would barely hit triple digits, have none.

I dunno, I know most of you here seem to be rabid against welfare, and you see the single moos as "cashing in big". But I have had friends who had one kid and no support, and welfare is really not all that! My friend was trying to live in DC, even back when a relatively "ordinary person" could afford an apartment there. She was getting so little from welfare that it would either pay the rent OR the food, etc. Never both. She was basically forced to work a cash "under the table" waitress job to make enough to live on. And, BTW, she lived in DC because of public transport and plentiful work, plus some actual nearby neighbors who would babysit. I've also seen people I know try to survive outside a city environment, and the big problem is you gotta have and maintain a car! Of COURSE, the real answer is don't have kids, but we can't seem to convert people fast enough. So many people fall for the hype, and/or it's all they know.
I think the only ones who live "well" from welfare are the folks who have friends or relatives they can live with (generally not terribly stable arrangements) or are willing the shelter-hop (also not great). I DID see some of these types when I worked at a women's shelter. But they have been raised in such a low class breeder culture, they REALLY cannot imagine or manage another type of life.

Quote
reeniebessagain
I dunno, I know most of you here seem to be rabid against welfare, and you see the single moos as "cashing in big". But I have had friends who had one kid and no support, and welfare is really not all that! My friend was trying to live in DC, even back when a relatively "ordinary person" could afford an apartment there. She was getting so little from welfare that it would either pay the rent OR the food, etc. Never both. She was basically forced to work a cash "under the table" waitress job to make enough to live on. And, BTW, she lived in DC because of public transport and plentiful work, plus some actual nearby neighbors who would babysit. I've also seen people I know try to survive outside a city environment, and the big problem is you gotta have and maintain a car! Of COURSE, the real answer is don't have kids, but we can't seem to convert people fast enough. So many people fall for the hype, and/or it's all they know.
I think the only ones who live "well" from welfare are the folks who have friends or relatives they can live with (generally not terribly stable arrangements) or are willing the shelter-hop (also not great). I DID see some of these types when I worked at a women's shelter. But they have been raised in such a low class breeder culture, they REALLY cannot imagine or manage another type of life.

She's what the leaders in the year 2540 of the sci fi novel Brave New World call a "delta" or "epsilon". Her kid will also grow up to be a "delta" or "epsilon". I feel sorry for children of "deltas" and "epsilons" because there's a nine of ten chance they'll knock up or get knocked up by their high school sweetheart, and perpetuate the cycle of poverty and ignorance. But once they CHOOSE to voluntarily FULFILL the delta prophecy, by assuming their genes are special, and need to be passed down....I don't feel sorry for them anymore. Why should I? Why should anyone? They chose what they chose.

well,in her case (as sometimes does happen!) there were some pretty mitigating circumstances. This woman got date-raped and preggers at the age of 16 before Roe v Wade. Add in Catholic and dysfunctional family, and she was sent to the nightmare Crittendon home. When the baby was born, she had the usual rosy-lenses teen fantasy that she might be able to keep the baby. Her parents told her , especially since the baby was biracial, that she would not be allowed to come home unless she gave it up. She spent the rest of her teens and early 20s obviously(to close friends, not to her!) "looking" for that baby, and yearning to replace it. So she did--and, surprise!!--with an alcoholic! Actually, and unbelievably that (newer) baby grew up to be an educated successful woman who "only" bred once---after beginning a decent career and marrying a fellow who was also well employed. So.... It's really not always so clear cut.

Quote
reeniebessagain
well,in her case (as sometimes does happen!) there were some pretty mitigating circumstances. This woman got date-raped and preggers at the age of 16 before Roe v Wade. Add in Catholic and dysfunctional family, and she was sent to the nightmare Crittendon home. When the baby was born, she had the usual rosy-lenses teen fantasy that she might be able to keep the baby. Her parents told her , especially since the baby was biracial, that she would not be allowed to come home unless she gave it up. She spent the rest of her teens and early 20s obviously(to close friends, not to her!) "looking" for that baby, and yearning to replace it. So she did--and, surprise!!--with an alcoholic! Actually, and unbelievably that (newer) baby grew up to be an educated successful woman who "only" bred once---after beginning a decent career and marrying a fellow who was also well employed. So.... It's really not always so clear cut.

I know someone with a very similar story, only she was 14 when she was raped. Catholic dysfunctional family...abortion was out of the question. She also lived in the middle of nowhere, so sneaking away to get one without her parents' knowledge was impossible. They "let"/made her keep it, but honestly she would have been better off had she given it up for adoption. (Well, best would have been abortion, but failing that....)

Quote
reeniebessagain
well,in her case (as sometimes does happen!) there were some pretty mitigating circumstances. This woman got date-raped and preggers at the age of 16 before Roe v Wade.

Well, I assumed your story was about a friend you knew in PRESENT times....not a friend from FIFTY or SIXTY some odd years ago

Quote
reeniebessagain
I dunno, I know most of you here seem to be rabid against welfare, and you see the single moos as "cashing in big". But I have had friends who had one kid and no support, and welfare is really not all that! My friend was trying to live in DC, even back when a relatively "ordinary person" could afford an apartment there. She was getting so little from welfare that it would either pay the rent OR the food, etc. Never both. She was basically forced to work a cash "under the table" waitress job to make enough to live on.

I'm not against welfare but I am against discrimination in welfare. Meaning a single person with one child can earn 4 times what a single person without children can earn and still qualify for welfare. That isn't remotely fair. Two people can almost live as cheaply as one but one person has to be making less than minimum wage to qualify? Ridiculous.

A single moo making $18 an hour plus receiving welfare is much better off than a single person making minimum wage. Not to even mention the food banks, holiday charities, etc. that will bend over backwards for moo. And society's attitude toward the single person is likely to be to suck it up and work 2 jobs at 60+ hours a week. Lots of people in that predicament are $100 or $200 away from a disaster. A single moo who is on welfare and working gets all of her taxes back (plus likely more) in a big check.

Also, a single person without kids is going to pay more in taxes over their lifetime than a single moo who spends a few years or more on welfare. So, single people are pretty much self-paying for welfare anyways along with lots of other benefits and tax write offs they won't receive.

well,CFA, pardon me for being old!

Quote
childfreeadvocate

Quote
reeniebessagain
well,in her case (as sometimes does happen!) there were some pretty mitigating circumstances. This woman got date-raped and preggers at the age of 16 before Roe v Wade.

Well, I assumed your story was about a friend you knew in PRESENT times....not a friend from FIFTY or SIXTY some odd years ago

The circumstances were still mitigating regardless of the time period.

Quote
freya

Quote
childfreeadvocate

Quote
reeniebessagain
well,in her case (as sometimes does happen!) there were some pretty mitigating circumstances. This woman got date-raped and preggers at the age of 16 before Roe v Wade.

Well, I assumed your story was about a friend you knew in PRESENT times....not a friend from FIFTY or SIXTY some odd years ago

The circumstances were still mitigating regardless of the time period.

I totally agree with Freya and Reeniebessagain.

thanks, Cassia and Freya. I have kept my outlook "honed", in this case, despite my advanced age, by working at the woman's shelter, etc.In that venue, I did see some people gaming the system, as one will in any situation. But I still stand by my opinion that very few are gaining any substantial "riches" from welfare.It's kind of like the argument against the death penalty that says it's better to let a few "get away" than to kill even one who doesn't deserve it. I also saw many who truly needed and benefited from what little we could do for them. Ideally, there are many, many improvements we could and should make with the society and culture in general that might eliminate these needs. But since we can see that is not happening any day soon, I think taking some minimal care of the afflicted is the best we can do.

Quote
cassia

Quote
freya

Quote
childfreeadvocate

Quote
reeniebessagain
well,in her case (as sometimes does happen!) there were some pretty mitigating circumstances. This woman got date-raped and preggers at the age of 16 before Roe v Wade.

Well, I assumed your story was about a friend you knew in PRESENT times....not a friend from FIFTY or SIXTY some odd years ago

The circumstances were still mitigating regardless of the time period.

I totally agree with Freya and Reeniebessagain.

Count me in, as well. Like Reeniebessagain, I've seen people who manipulated the welfare system, as well as those who truly benefited from it (including CF people). And I've seen people whose choices were taken out of their hands, one way or another.