View Poll Results: What does disability mean and who should get it?

Voters
36. You may not vote on this poll
  • It means unmanagable pain and those people should get it

    9 25.00%
  • It means one might get a chance to retire early and play

    2 5.56%
  • It is another way to fleece taxpayers and no one should get it

    2 5.56%
  • who cares, it is unmanagable

    0 0%
  • who cares, it is insignificant expenditure for the US

    1 2.78%
  • It should be completely overhauled, re-written, and inspected for cheaters

    26 72.22%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 51 of 58 FirstFirst ... 414950515253 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 510 of 580

Thread: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

  1. #501
    Sage
    JC Callender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Metro Detroit
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,632

    Re: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    I am helping the disabled with my own money, via taxes. I don't miss that money, because it's small in comparison to other portions of the federal budget. 12% of the budget goes to support safety net programs. I also already donate to organizations which support the disabled, anonymously, because I don't need that feeling you are describing. I am not self-aggrandizing and nor do I wish to ever make anyone feel beholden to me.

    If all federal programs were to end, 12% of my taxes would not go very far in helping a single disabled person so that they could survive on part time pay and my heart would break to see their small measure of self-sufficiency end as they had to take refuge in some horrid institution. I do not believe in putting innocent people into potentially hellish conditions so that few Annies, Abes and Twains might pop out. Scarred by the experience as they would too be.

    So now we are back to discussing what would happen to those for whom charity cannot provide. Charitable contributions go down in hard times. So what about those who are lucky enough to receive charity, but then whose lives are upended when charity runs out in a down turn? Government funds can be effected, but not like a charity, which can dry up over night.
    I don't think it's self-aggrandizing to want your money to go to a personal charity of your choice in a much more efficient way than the government could handle it. I also don't think there's anything wrong with feeling good about giving to those in need, unless one is doing it solely for recognition. And your 12% may not be much, and neither is mine, but what about the millionaires? What if you were a millionaire, that 12% would be much more. Think of what you could do with that. I'm sure most millionaires are where they're at because they now how to be efficient and frugal with their money, searching for the best investments.

    Charitable donations may dry up during recessions, but the huge charities that would administer these donations I'm sure would make investments that would ensure people are taken care of during these times. Look at how inefficient the government is, don't you think if you ran a charity that you could do better?

  2. #502
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,892

    Re: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

    Quote Originally Posted by JC Callender View Post
    I don't think it's self-aggrandizing to want your money to go to a personal charity of your choice in a much more efficient way than the government could handle it. I also don't think there's anything wrong with feeling good about giving to those in need, unless one is doing it solely for recognition. And your 12% may not be much, and neither is mine, but what about the millionaires? What if you were a millionaire, that 12% would be much more. Think of what you could do with that. I'm sure most millionaires are where they're at because they now how to be efficient and frugal with their money, searching for the best investments.

    Charitable donations may dry up during recessions, but the huge charities that would administer these donations I'm sure would make investments that would ensure people are taken care of during these times. Look at how inefficient the government is, don't you think if you ran a charity that you could do better?
    I feel good giving, in private. I do not need to be acknowledged. Preening while I hand someone a check? Looking into their eyes at a time when they are possibly most defeated at the same time grateful. No, that is not for me.

    Millionaires got where they are by maximizing their income making potential. There is no income to be made in charitable enterprises. They are not investments and I would not be so foolhardy as to believe they would in turn giveaway that 12%.

    Oh, yes, huge charities invest. They invest in the same kinds of financial instruments the rest of us do and while our 401 (k)s became 201 (k)s in 2008, so did those investments held by charities. They are no more bullet proof than the rest of us.

    I don't know that I could do better. When a person is receiving a subsidy or a disability check, the government has a right to review their circumstances to see that they qualify. Such would not be the case for a charity. There a limitations and fraud would be more rampant. Charities are defrauded, all the time.
    I don't attack my constituents. Bob is my constituent now.
    This is the important stuff. We canít get lost in discrimination. We canít get lost in B.S. We canít get lost tearing each other down. I want to make a point here that no matter what you look like, where you come from, how you worship, who you love, how you identify, and yeah, how you run, that if you have good public policy ideas, if you are well qualified for office, bring those ideas to the table, because this is your America, too. This is our commonwealth of Virginia, too.
    Danica Roem - The nation's first openly transgender person elected to serve in a U.S. state legislature.

  3. #503
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,689

    Re: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

    Quote Originally Posted by JC Callender View Post
    I understand we have to tolerate corporate welfare, but I'm against it just as I'm against regular welfare. And I wouldn't end these programs today (well, maybe corporate welfare), I would scale them down over maybe 5 years. Wouldn't you be at least a little excited at the thought of how you could help the disabled yourself with your own money that you would be getting back since the government wouldn't be using it anymore? I'm sure you, like most people, are more efficient with your own money than the government is, and the look on someones face as you personally hand them a check, or the thought of walking into an organization that you had a personal hand in building and/or maintaining would be a pretty satisfying feeling.
    The problem with this premise is it seems to believe it is an effective means of dealing with societal ills for this population. It's not. From my angle, all I see is the argument to strip down the nature of social programs so that we disabled folk can admire your philanthropic fantasies and be grateful for the crumbs you give. Meanwhile, our lot in life has decreased.

    Frankly and crudely, if you want to masturbate, don't ask us to help you out.
    Last edited by Fiddytree; 10-19-13 at 09:13 PM.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  4. #504
    Sage
    JC Callender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Metro Detroit
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,632

    Re: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    I feel good giving, in private. I do not need to be acknowledged. Preening while I hand someone a check? Looking into their eyes at a time when they are possibly most defeated at the same time grateful. No, that is not for me.

    Millionaires got where they are by maximizing their income making potential. There is no income to be made in charitable enterprises. They are not investments and I would not be so foolhardy as to believe they would in turn giveaway that 12%.

    Oh, yes, huge charities invest. They invest in the same kinds of financial instruments the rest of us do and while our 401 (k)s became 201 (k)s in 2008, so did those investments held by charities. They are no more bullet proof than the rest of us.

    I don't know that I could do better. When a person is receiving a subsidy or a disability check, the government has a right to review their circumstances to see that they qualify. Such would not be the case for a charity. There a limitations and fraud would be more rampant. Charities are defrauded, all the time.
    I think there is income to be made from contracting with charities, they have to buy their stuff from somewhere. I'm sure they wouldn't pay nearly what the government pays for things, but contractors could definitely make money. And I'm sure some millionaires would give more than 12 percent. Many of them leave tons of money to charities when they die.

    And a government does review a persons circumstances before giving them benefits, but have historically had a pretty horrible record of rampant corruption because of their lackluster efforts. I'm sure most charities wouldn't put up with it to that extent, because if they did, people would just donate elsewhere.

  5. #505
    Sage
    JC Callender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Metro Detroit
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,632

    Re: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    The problem with this premise is it seems to believe it is an effective means of dealing with societal ills for this population. It's not. From my angle, all I see is the argument to strip down the nature of social programs so that we disabled folk can admire your philanthropic fantasies and be grateful for the crumbs you give. Meanwhile, our lot in life has decreased.

    Frankly and crudely, if you want to masturbate, don't ask us to help you out.
    Why does someone else who you've never met owe you a comfortable living?

  6. #506
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,689

    Re: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

    Quote Originally Posted by JC Callender View Post
    Why does someone else who you've never met owe you a comfortable living?
    There it is. Is this that tacit acceptance that our lot in life will decrease with your ideas? Of course it was not long ago you claimed that charity would improve matters. The real driving impulse seems to come out when you expose the frailty of the Ayn Rand doctrinaire.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  7. #507
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,892

    Re: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

    Quote Originally Posted by JC Callender View Post
    I think there is income to be made from contracting with charities, they have to buy their stuff from somewhere. I'm sure they wouldn't pay nearly what the government pays for things, but contractors could definitely make money. And I'm sure some millionaires would give more than 12 percent. Many of them leave tons of money to charities when they die.

    And a government does review a persons circumstances before giving them benefits, but have historically had a pretty horrible record of rampant corruption because of their lackluster efforts. I'm sure most charities wouldn't put up with it to that extent, because if they did, people would just donate elsewhere.
    The government is consistent. Having to rely on the largesse and willingness of charitable givers is a haphazard way to operate any enterprise that provides the basics to live; three hots and a cot. That is, if someone can get a millionaire to be interested in their project. I don't know why you think the wealthy would come out of the woodwork to serve the disabled. If it's such a hot investment, why aren't there better services for them now? Or the homeless? Shelters have to constantly hunt for resources. It takes great human effort to fulfill their needs. Have you ever worked with the homeless? Or know anyone who does that work?

    Why would you think that people would be any less likely to bilk charities than they are the government? Charities cannot impose penalties, fines or prison for fraud. The government can and people still flaunt the government. Charities have no authority and no resources to verify information they do get.
    I don't attack my constituents. Bob is my constituent now.
    This is the important stuff. We canít get lost in discrimination. We canít get lost in B.S. We canít get lost tearing each other down. I want to make a point here that no matter what you look like, where you come from, how you worship, who you love, how you identify, and yeah, how you run, that if you have good public policy ideas, if you are well qualified for office, bring those ideas to the table, because this is your America, too. This is our commonwealth of Virginia, too.
    Danica Roem - The nation's first openly transgender person elected to serve in a U.S. state legislature.

  8. #508
    Sage
    JC Callender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Metro Detroit
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,632

    Re: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    The government is consistent. Having to rely on the largesse and willingness of charitable givers is a haphazard way to operate any enterprise that provides the basics to live; three hots and a cot. That is, if someone can get a millionaire to be interested in their project. I don't know why you think the wealthy would come out of the woodwork to serve the disabled. If it's such a hot investment, why aren't there better services for them now? Or the homeless? Shelters have to constantly hunt for resources. It takes great human effort to fulfill their needs. Have you ever worked with the homeless? Or know anyone who does that work?

    Why would you think that people would be any less likely to bilk charities than they are the government? Charities cannot impose penalties, fines or prison for fraud. The government can and people still flaunt the government. Charities have no authority and no resources to verify information they do get.

    The government is consistently bad. A charity that performed that way wouldn't be around long enough to perform that way. And why do you believe you have the desire to help but the wealthy wouldn't?

    We have a food bank in Detroit called Gleaners, and the incredible amount of food they receive always amazes me. It seems like every food drive from schools to churches to other organizations and charities goes down to Gleaners. Think of all of the different churches alone in your area and the money, food, and clothes they collect and still many people don't give to the poor and disabled in America anymore because they feel like the government is handling it. As far as the homeless go, there are resources in shelters and food, but I don't know what else can be done for them.

    And to your last point, people will take advantage of charities, but the corruption wouldn't have to go nearly as deep as it does in the government because people aren't forced to give to charities. They can give somewhere else if they think one is irresponsible enough. I've seen Bill O'Reilly exposing charities on his show and many people who see that decide to give their money elsewhere.

  9. #509
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,892

    Re: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

    Quote Originally Posted by JC Callender View Post
    The government is consistently bad. A charity that performed that way wouldn't be around long enough to perform that way. And why do you believe you have the desire to help but the wealthy wouldn't?

    We have a food bank in Detroit called Gleaners, and the incredible amount of food they receive always amazes me. It seems like every food drive from schools to churches to other organizations and charities goes down to Gleaners. Think of all of the different churches alone in your area and the money, food, and clothes they collect and still many people don't give to the poor and disabled in America anymore because they feel like the government is handling it. As far as the homeless go, there are resources in shelters and food, but I don't know what else can be done for them.

    And to your last point, people will take advantage of charities, but the corruption wouldn't have to go nearly as deep as it does in the government because people aren't forced to give to charities. They can give somewhere else if they think one is irresponsible enough. I've seen Bill O'Reilly exposing charities on his show and many people who see that decide to give their money elsewhere.
    That the government is consistently bad, is your platitude. Those who receive disability might have complaints but they are consistently getting aid because the government will be around unlike the charity that does a bad job or cannot sustain its funding. Those, by your own words, can and do dissolve. Why do I believe I have a desire the wealthy don't? Because there aren't widespread charitable programs to fill the needs the government doesn't meet now. There are multi-millionaires and billionaires, with more than enough to give millions now, without taxes being returned, yet there are massive needs out there.

    There are Gleaners in my area too. They do a fantastic job of feeding people. At this level. Throw thousands off disability, and it would stress their ability to provide.

    You are clearly not getting what disability provides for people. It keeps them living independently or in group homes. They can work part time, if capable, and still be independent. Take that away. Now what? Describe what you see happening.

    To your last paragraph, there you have a glaring reason to not depend on charity, as I stated in my first paragraph, they go away. People depending on bad charities would be left in a lurch and possibly dire circumstances. There are loads of them now which are scams. Increasing charitable donations would only exacerbate that.
    I don't attack my constituents. Bob is my constituent now.
    This is the important stuff. We canít get lost in discrimination. We canít get lost in B.S. We canít get lost tearing each other down. I want to make a point here that no matter what you look like, where you come from, how you worship, who you love, how you identify, and yeah, how you run, that if you have good public policy ideas, if you are well qualified for office, bring those ideas to the table, because this is your America, too. This is our commonwealth of Virginia, too.
    Danica Roem - The nation's first openly transgender person elected to serve in a U.S. state legislature.

  10. #510
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,689

    Re: What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

    Quote Originally Posted by JC Callender View Post
    The government is consistently bad. A charity that performed that way wouldn't be around long enough to perform that way. And why do you believe you have the desire to help but the wealthy wouldn't?
    The middle to upper class rich would disproportionately help the disabled in comparison with the lower classes, but that is due to leisure and potential social mission work. If there is no wide-scale social impulse as there was in the late 19th and early 20th century, you get less middle class and upper class folks helping those causes. The private social reform impulse in America was largely dormant until the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and eventually subsided. That being said, it did not get the job done. That's why the middle and upper classes engaged in private associations bothered advocating for such governmental interventions in the first place. The problems were considered too big to conquer through private association alone.

    There are limits to government action, and traditional methods of ameliorating social distress need to be promoted (hence why I thought the Bush and Obama administrations correctly perceived the nature of faith-based initiatives) but it is immensely foolish to suggest that an entirely private venture would do more than make matters worse.

    We have a food bank in Detroit called Gleaners, and the incredible amount of food they receive always amazes me. It seems like every food drive from schools to churches to other organizations and charities goes down to Gleaners. Think of all of the different churches alone in your area and the money, food, and clothes they collect and still many people don't give to the poor and disabled in America anymore because they feel like the government is handling it. As far as the homeless go, there are resources in shelters and food, but I don't know what else can be done for them.
    The rate of "incredible" is rather low if you are wanting to compare it to a district and statewide program, let alone national.

    And to your last point, people will take advantage of charities, but the corruption wouldn't have to go nearly as deep as it does in the government because people aren't forced to give to charities. They can give somewhere else if they think one is irresponsible enough. I've seen Bill O'Reilly exposing charities on his show and many people who see that decide to give their money elsewhere.
    You're seriously suggesting consumer choice has meaning here?
    Last edited by Fiddytree; 10-20-13 at 03:53 PM.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

Page 51 of 58 FirstFirst ... 414950515253 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •