Too Fat To Work - Need More Benefit Money
- Thread starter Twila
- Start date
Every single word that came out of their mouths is complete BS. Fruits and vegetables are too expensive? We don't have time to exercise(why? It's not like you work or anything.:roll! Blah blah blah!
I could stand to lose some weight, but I at least have a job and get a modicum of exercise. I can lose the weight if I apply myself, just like these lazy sacks of poop can. Too bad there wasn't something that could be done to force them to lose the weight and therefore get a job and get off disability.
Bacon fatties for lunch? Yep. It's hereditary all right.:roll:
Fitness classes might help too. We take it for granted that we knwo how to work. They've never been taught. We need to teach them. One possibility could be to make them earn their assistance by showing up to lessons. Later, this could prove beneficial in working in the nutrition or fitnes industries. having experience of what it's like, they might make good fitness and nutrition councellors themselves in future if taught how to live well.
I agree with helping them, but beleive that throwing money at them is not helping them. Instead of giving them money, it might be wiser to just provide them with dorm beds at the school and feed them there. Maybe they can volunteer in the kitchen and so on too while they're getting their education.
And that's why our direct taxes should be 100% charity deductible. So when we see charities that are actually teahing people how to fish while giving them fish rather than just giving them fish alone, we can give to them instead of governent s that don't care enough about them to really teach them how to fish.
And that makes sence. Before we give them one cen, we should find out what the problem is.
You're illiterate? OK, take a literacy course. We'll provide you with room and board, necessary clothing, books, pens, etc. at the school where you will live.
You're an opium addict? Fine, same thing. We won't give you money, but we will give you rehab.
Don't have any job skills? Fine, teach him a trade or profession, but again, don't give him money, give him room, board, clothing, books, pens and edcation.
Don't know how to eat properly. Same thing.
I'm not looking down on any of these people, and don't want to sound cruel. I genuinely beleive that this is the best way to help them. In fact, if I were in their position, that's how I'd want to be heped.
If I were a drug addict, the last thing I'd want you to do is give me money! I'd want you to care for me. That means locking me up if you have to. If you really care for me, that is. I wouldn't want your money. I'd want your knowledge, your wisdom. I'd want to know how it is that you succeeded and I didn't. Help me!
If it's dealing with emotions, then teach me how to do that, but don't just give me money so that I can spend it like before.
Giving them money is a cop out. Educating them shows we care.
There are a LOT of jobs out there that require a limited amount of effort/and or intelligence. If there is a woman that is mentally challenged that can work at Taco Bell than there is a job out there for people who's only disablity is that they are lazy.
Why should the onus just be placed on everyone else besides the people onto whom the onus should fall on in the first place. They are lazy. That is all. There is nothing there that says that they do not know how to work(besides themselves, and why would they say that they know how to work lest they be forced to work because of that). Someone has to be taught how to deliver papers? How to mow the lawn? They are NOT victims in the least. They have done this to themselves and I do not feel too sympathetic to them.
How can adults of reasonable intelligence not know that bacon fatties are not healthy. We are inundated with warnings about unhealthy food on the internet, on television, in the newspapers. Heck, word of mouth! They have no excuse and should not have to be taught anything.
If we look at it that way, then one possibility could be that, if they don't know how to find work, then a local charity could hire them. Low salary of course, and they don't get to choose the job. An appropriate one for their abilities of course, but still something that will give them enough to survive. Gardening? Mowing the lawn? Who knows. But we can't let them just starve to death. Though we should be allowed to stipulate the requirements for assistance. If we think they don't know how to eat properly, the local charity could choose to give them less money but to make healthy meal free in the cafeteria during their lunch hour breaks?
The work would burn off calories and give them work experience and a sence of accomplishment. But I still beleive that if they genuinely don't know where to start to get a job, to just cut assistance cold turkey would likely kill them literally. Humanity has to kick in here too.
I never once said that they should starve to death. Of course that would not be the way to go about things. I just don't think they need to be taught what is healthy to eat and what isn't. Obviously they already know that, as they said that it is too expensive to get "greens".
You're making big assumptions. A few points:
1. Even today not everyone watches TV.
2. When I was in high school, las year, I remember a teacher telling us of a former student of his in the same grade we were in asking how come Australia wasn't under water with all the water flowing down to it from up North. After all, water flows downward, and Australia is at the bottom of the map.
3. When I was in the military, we were taught how to wash properly. Yes, how to wash properly. We gigled, thinking it was funny. The instructor then explainwed why he was teaching us. As it turned out, a year earlier a soldier had itches. Whne he'd gone to see the doctor, it turned out he had thick old layers of soap under his scrotum that had been there for years. He'd never thought of raising his scrotum to wash underneath!
4. On another occasion, I'd met a businessman who didn't know how to use acomputer. He coud barely type!
So no, you have lived a lucky life in which your parents or someone had taught you properly. Human have few instincts. For the most part, everything we know, we know because we'd been taught. If you're not taught to wash under your scrotum, and you'ver never been taught basis hygiene or basic logic, or basic nutrition, you might not know.
Count your lucky stars for the education your parents gave you, including how to eat and how to clean yourself, which you take for granted.
Then let's cut their food allowance and just give them the food directly. Healthy food of course. And thogh we can consult them on what they like to eat, we make the final decision based on nutritional value,a nd they can take it or leave it.
I'm not making assumptions. I am gathering it from the OP. They said they can't buy healthy food as it is too expensive. Therefore, they know what food is healthy and what food isn't.
Another point, Are you sure they know. Some people think greens means nothig more than salad. If so, they'd not last long on a salad diet. Maybe they know. Maybe they don't. But let's find out before giving them any more money.
In fact, let's not give them ay money. Give them room and board and the necessities for their education, rehabilitation, or (re-)entry into the workforce, whatever the case might be.
Let's not give them money at al, but simply what they need directly.
Let's not give them money at al, but simply what they need directly.
More efficient tht way, and that way we can keep a closer tab on how that money is spent, not on cigarettes, alcohol, drugs, etc.
The point is moot for us, as this is not taking place in Canada.;-)
Good suggestions, though.:smile:
Good suggestions, though.:smile:
Are you sure about that?
Honestly, I don't care too much how high my taxes go (within reason of course). My main concern is with how much say I have in how that tax money is spent. As far as I'm concerned, any direct tax shoud be 100% deductible on a 1-1 ratio through charitable contributions. This way, charities wouldneed to be more responsive and genuinely care to help the poor. Not just through money at them, but to HELP them. Giving money and helping are not the same thing. Such charities could teach them how to fish, instead of hour our governments just give them a fish. I'd be terrified of getting caught up in Canada's 'safety-net'. I know the government would give me money. But for what? So I can continue whatever it was that got me there in the fist place? What if I was a drug addict or a sex addict, or whatever? And the governmetn would just give me money to make it worse? Thanks for caring! Instead, I would want them to give me not one red cent, but to actually care for me and educate me, teach me.
By the way. i might sound cruel when I suggest that we give them no money, but I just want ot point out that it's not about my not wanting pay more taxes for them or whatver, or not making my contribution to help. In fact, I wouldn't mind giving the poor more money per year if it gets them off social assistance sooner. After all, such an investment would pay for itself. Like I'd mentioned above, it would be better to invest 30,000 a year on them for two years of education, retraining, job experience etc. than spend 10,000 on them for 12 years.
Add to that the taxes they pay once they're back on their feet, and even more precious, their happiness.
Add to that the taxes they pay once they're back on their feet, and even more precious, their happiness.