| |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
| |
| Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
12-08-2019, 08:58 AM
|
#1
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,403
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
if you’re able-bodied, able-minded, under age 50, and have no kids....why can’t you spend 20
hours a week earning the welfare that others pay for? Seriously, what’s wrong with that?
i have no problem
whatsoever, helping people
who cannot work. But people who can work, but choose. not to? That’s a very different animal.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Jim under the current law this is already required.. (20hours) the change is the red tape to extend the benefits and the 6% unemployment rate. Requirements.. 1 or 2 less f 35s fighters would save more money ..
Honestly i wish they put more efforts it kicking out the live in boyfriends..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
|
|
|
|
|
12-08-2019, 09:49 AM
|
#2
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,435
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
..
Honestly i wish they put more efforts it kicking out the live in boyfriends..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
👍🏻
Floridaman won’t do anything about that, he’s the guy who states building income one way for loans and another for taxes.
Sort of the same thing (fraud) but on a larger scale.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
|
|
12-08-2019, 10:47 AM
|
#3
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
Jim under the current law this is already required.. (20hours) the change is the red tape to extend the benefits and the 6% unemployment rate. Requirements.. 1 or 2 less f 35s fighters would save more money ..
Honestly i wish they put more efforts it kicking out the live in boyfriends..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Many of the live-in boyfriends, are boyfriends and not husbands, because the moms get more welfare if they're not married. Growing up I knew three couples were were married in every practical sense, but never got legally married because staying leglly single, allowed the mom to get a bigger welfare check. I knew three families that did this. It's disgusting. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-08-2019, 11:05 AM
|
#4
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,403
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
Many of the live-in boyfriends, are boyfriends and not husbands, because the moms get more welfare if they're not married. Growing up I knew three couples were were married in every practical sense, but never got legally married because staying leglly single, allowed the mom to get a bigger welfare check. I knew three families that did this. It's disgusting.
|
I have a good friend who had a child at 18 she was on welfare for 2 years he went in the army , then he got a State job and they attached his pay to recover the 2 years ..
Here was a guy using the system as it was designed to help in a bad spot short term , and they did this,, some incentive to leave |
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:13 AM.
|
| |
Hybrid Mode