Welfare Moms - Should we be supporting moms so they can stay at home with their children? - Page 15

[Drummer's Wife]

She's gone, anyway - asked to have her account removed, so I doubt she'll be back.

Plenty of people take issue with welfare; there is, however, a way to argue your point respectfully.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[azgirl]

Originally Posted by Lillitu 

Lynnsg's posts are offensive and classist- in other words, bigoted. Where are the moderators in all this? I certainly hope she got a warning for making bigoted remarks against the poor. If she had targeted people of color or gays the issue would be truly obvious- but because Americans try really hard not to talk about class, she gets away with this crap? I am formally asking the mods to talk to her about her offensive remarks in this post.

Can you define classist for me? I found the posts slightly offensive due to the aggressive style, but I didn't find them bigoted or classist. I'm not being argumentative or snarky, I want to understand your point of view. Could you point me to specific words or phrases that you feel where bigoted or classist?

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by joensally 
I don't know how long you were in Ontario, but Quebec is unique in Canada in terms of their structure, taxation and social control.  Were you eligible for any government transfers or subsidies while in Canada?  Those can off-set some of the tax burden.

yes, it is. It's one of the reasons it annoys me when people say "Canada does X" because so many things are at the provincial level. There isn't a "Canadian Health Care System," there's one system in Ontario, and one in Quebec, and one in Manitoba, etc. And they really differ in quality.  Americans tend to be very ignorant about Canada -- half of them don't know the capitol and couldn't tell you which provinces border the US, but they think they understand the health care system.

Canadians, though, are often ignorant about key aspects of what social supports to exist in the US, such as charity hospitals, clinics with sliding scales, etc. Some of the things people said to me when I was up there were pretty out there. We really aren't as barbaric as many Canadians have been led to believe.

However, Quebec is an excellence example of more social support, higher taxes, and more social control.

When we were living Quebec, the leading cause of death for adults under 45 was suicide. I don't know if that's related, but there seems to be a belief in the US that "if only the government did x, everyone could be happy," and that's clearly not the case. Quebec does everything, and a lot of people there are miserable.

We HATED living in Quebec. We ended up moving to Ontario and my DH commuted to his job in Quebec, which really screwed us up because we didn't qualify for anything from either province, and we paid Quebec taxes.

I would far rather the government let me keep my money and decide how to spend, than to take it away and then decide whether or not I can have it back. I like a capitalist system with floor. No one should go hungry. Everyone should receive basic medical care.

I am OK with the two tire system. The health care system in Quebec is similar to what poor people in the states get. I went to Canada a fan of universal health care, and came up thinking it meant "equally crappy care for all."  (Ontario's was better, but not in line with what we get in the US. Our providers in Ontario -- doctors and dentists -- were EXCELLENT. But the system isn't adequate for the number of people it serves. It just isn't.

We've lived in the UK as well as Canada, and we prefer living in the US.

[kathymuggle]

Quebec is different in many way than other provinces (I lived there for many years).  I do not like Quebec - much of what Linda said is very true.  I think the suicide rate is multi factorial.  

I have seen people on welfare in Quebec - and it is not pretty.  The government is so worried about fraud and people getting it when they do not need it that they are a total pain in the ass.  Lots of paperwork and rules.  People end up fighting with the government constantly.  Furthermore, there seems to be an assumption if you are on welfare that you are not very capable.  (My positive experience with welfare was in BC.  I have heard it is a little less positive now, but still. Yeah, B.C !.) The resources welfare offers are often borderline insulting - how to cook, how to budget, literacy.  I do know some people do not know these things - but there was no real retraining or anything similar for those that needed help finding a job, but actually know the food groups, thank you very much.  I also think it is common for governments to give people enough to survive (just) but hardly thrive.  Sadly I doubt this attitude is unique to Quebec.  

For individuals, I think it is a better to be off welfare.  It is not a great way of life and people who are not on welfare seem happier than those I have seen on welfare (although does welfare cause this, or are the issues that cause people to need welfare at the root?  Both, I think)

However, individual needs are not the same as provincial or state policy.  We need to feed and shelter people while they figure out how to get off welfare.  We need programs that support people in getting off welfare.  We need to figure out ways to break the poverty cycle/generational poverty.  To a degree we need to accept that poverty is always going to be with us.  We should not punish children for their parents being on welfare (no matter how they ended up on welfare).

OT - I have also had great medical care across the board in Ontario.  There can be long wait times, but I have never had trouble getting timely care in an emergency.  Quebec can be good or bad - but it is much less consistent in its care.  Whenever we visit Quebec we joke that if anyone gets sick we are driving to the nearest town over the Ontario border.   

And lastly, I think much of Canadians and Americans ignorance of each is thanks to the media, and extremists on issues, who paint the other country and their ideas as demonic.    

[mammal_mama]

Yesterday I had a great time reading John Stuart MIll's essay "On Liberty." (You can read it online here http://www.constitution.org/jsm/liberty.htm if you want).

It really got me thinking about the different views we all have about the role of government in the life of the inidividual. I realize Mill would probably be appalled that there are now families, such as my own, receiving government assistance with things like food and medical care.

I think we are all really different in terms of where we draw the line on these things. For example, I've developed a personal code wherein, if I decide to help someone, I just help them and I no longer attach myself to what that person does with my help or whether that person is living as I think he or she should be living. It's so much less stressful that way, and I feel so much freer now that i realize I really do have a choice about whether to do things for people.

Of course, in the case of welfare, I realize the individual taxpayers don't have that moment by moment choice about where their money goes. If I were in a higher tax bracket, maybe I'd be better to understand the angst that some people feel about  their hard-earned taxes going to help families like mine. As it is, I've paid relatively little in taxes and, well, dh and I are usually in a big hurry to file our returns because of the huge chunk we currently get back every year...

So I'll admit that I kind of lack empathy for the people who earn enough to actually have to pay a lot. And I'll admit that a little more empathy on both sides  (or every facet) of this issue would make for a much more respectful discussion.

But, about Mill, the thing that really impressed me was what he had to say about determining the extent to which the opinion of the majority should be allowed to constrain the individual. He felt that this should just be limited to cases of self-defense or defense of people who are being harmed and can't defend themselves.

And, of course, we all draw the line differently when it comes to defining harm and determining who we think is being harmed. For example, some in my family think that dh and I are harming our girls by unschooling them. Thankfully, the government in our area does not currently have much jurisdiction over homeschooling families, save for those cases in which social workers feel that there are signs of possble abuse or neglect. But then, I imagine social workers are individuals, too, and though they have some guidelines, there probably are some cases where one social worker might see a need to get involved with a family but another social worker wouldn't.

I just hope that all social workers have read Mill. :)

[Shantimama]

Originally Posted by Lillitu 

Lynnsg's posts are offensive and classist- in other words, bigoted. Where are the moderators in all this? I certainly hope she got a warning for making bigoted remarks against the poor. If she had targeted people of color or gays the issue would be truly obvious- but because Americans try really hard not to talk about class, she gets away with this crap? I am formally asking the mods to talk to her about her offensive remarks in this post.

The moderators do not read every single post on MDC. When you see something that you believe violates the User Agreement please bring that specific post to the forum moderator's attention by clicking the red flag report button found at the bottom of every post. 

[chaoticzenmom]

Originally Posted by Shantimama 

The moderators do not read every single post on MDC. When you see something that you believe violates the User Agreement please bring that specific post to the forum moderator's attention by clicking the red flag report button found at the bottom of every post. 

In this case, I've handled the situation.  I felt like the earlier offensive comments added too much to the conversation to pull it easily, so I left it.  If I had seen in in the first few minutes, I would have pulled it, but since many people put thoughtful posts afterwards, it didn't seem fair to remove it all.  A lot of it has actually been removed.

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by mammal_mama 

So I'll admit that I kind of lack empathy for the people who earn enough to actually have to pay a lot. And I'll admit that a little more empathy on both sides  (or every facet) of this issue would make for a much more respectful discussion.

Yes.  I have felt a lack of empathy for whining (judging perhaps, but it is how I felt) from wealthy folk on taxation, welfare, etc.  I have mellowed a bit as I age, but I still have no issues with any of my tax dollars going to social spending.  Sometimes I wish the money was spent differently within certain social spending programs, but I have no issues with it in general.  

Someone up tread mentioned classism and I wonder if this plays into it? Painting in very broad strokes - but different classes complaining about the other classes and how the government spends on it does look like classism.  

I think it is the governments job to try and meet the needs of its people - of all classes.  I do tend to think that because a) rich people have more power and influence and b) most government officials come from wealthy-ish backgrounds, that policy might sway slightly in favour of the rich.  Add in that some policy that helps the wealthy helps everybody (example - low taxes attracting businesses) and it is a whole big ball of wax.

[Alenushka]

I am not wealthy. I am lower middle class. I do not own a house snf never will. I pay taxes and because I am wage earner ratehr than an investor I pay a lot. Yes, I have right to whine. Middle class is...in the middle and get very little benefit for paying taxes.

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by Alenushka 

I am not wealthy. I am lower middle class. I do not own a house snf never will. I pay taxes and because I am wage earner ratehr than an investor I pay a lot. Yes, I have right to whine. Middle class is...in the middle and get very little benefit for paying taxes.

You can whine if you want to   Indeed, me whining about wealthy whining is still whining.

I think mammal mama hit it on the head that empathy is what is needed.

I agree the middle class (particularly the lower middle class) has it rougher  financially than many others.  

[aparent]

   I feel that as the other children of the world will

be my children's friends, countrymen, coworkers

and world citizens then my parenting should embody

a concern for all the world's children and if any parent

has a situation that allows them more time with

their children or less financial stress which lets

them parent more effectively than that's great.

I hope that efforts would be made so that more

and more parents are freed to focus on the next

generation as we all focus not on the gross national

product (GNP) but more and more on great national

parenting.