Current welfare system ruining our economy

First getting on Disability of any kind is not easy in my case SSI it took a bit over a year, tons of forms, doctors sending reports and visiting an SSI doctor then after a panel review I got benefits for one year before my second review by another panel and now get benefits for three years until my next review. The government determined twice I'm unable to be employed enough to support myself a low bar could I earn the Federal Poverty Line in income a year that's around $11,500 a year. If I could be hired I could earn that working part-time at say Target.

And I do look for work even now but the local disability vocational rehab office said I can't be trained for a job, PTEC our local county trade schools run by the county department of education evaluated me and said the same thing and if I apply for jobs I need to tell them I need adaptive software and such when I apply which likely kills my applications. And with my hand disabilities I can't even play a musical instrument anymore so sidewalk performing is gone to and puppetry and juggling or any other skills I have in that area. So what are some of us supposed to do? The government said I can't be trained, my local best trade school option and they teach office kinds of work and things like electronics I could do sitting says it would be a waste of my money and time and the SSA gave me benefits without seeing a judge which is only done if their medical experts and vocational counselors say this person cannot work at the time of review and will decide when the review happens again. Three years means its very likely I'll end up on benefits until I die when its a second review they will go to a seven year cycle unless I improve.

As for the GED I can tell you what will happen people will get one, this won't let you join any armed service branch in most cases save maybe the Army if you blow away your aptitude tests and most employers will favor those with a High School Diploma or some college or holds a degree of any kind even if a coffee jockey at a Starbucks. And all line manufacturing jobs a person could do are gone for the most part the modern factory is a skilled area of employment often requiring a committed associates degree or apprenticeship. As long as employers can choose they will toss out the least educated and disabled or anyone else they care to.

 

A lot of people with legitimate disabilities are denied benefits. In my experience, most everyone is denied on the first try. But, if you fall into certain categories, you are a shoo in for getting assistance. Those who dole out the money look out for those of their own kind.

While you may have a hard time being retrained, there are a LOT of people who are able bodied, but simply had rather be dependent upon someone else for a living. IF the government says a GED is not good enough to get into the military, then maybe someone should look into it. The GED is the equivalent of a high school diploma, administered by the government, and should be accepted by all government entities.

I posted my thoughts because there are a lot of unanswered questions about the way we operate as a society. You're saying a GED is not accepted as a basis to make people equal... if true, it needs to be looked into. My complaint is that we allow employers to look at a person's criminal background when it may be irrelevant to a job. We have all these laws making every small indiscretion a crime so that the youth are locked out of the job market while foreigners, who have no criminal record in the U.S. have a better shot at a job. My wife has a son with several misdemeanors and the only jobs he finds are part time jobs at Subway while countless other entry level jobs are available in the area.

He is dependent upon the taxpayers for his daily bread and those who dole out the money are happy to do so... free medical care at the hospital... the whole enchilada and he will never work a full time job due to the generosity of the American taxpayer and his mommy. Don't you think it's time we got down to the truth?

 

once again the myth that Obama let in the illegals when those of us with rationale minds know that it was Bush who let them in

 

I don't know what myth you're trying to dispel, but we have an income tax and a payroll tax. Social security is funded by the payroll tax and when necessary redemption of Treasury securities which is where the excess collected revenue is invested until which time it is needed. While Social security is a budget item, it currently remains fully funded and does not directly contribute to the budget deficit.
Illegal aliens, while currently ineligible to apply and receive Social Security payments are unlikely to have a FICA tax deduction as they have no social security number, and it is also unlikely employers would be deducting income taxes or paying them by check. But there are some circumstances I'm aware of, that I have posted previously, where a legal alien who is not working allows an illegal alien to use his/her social security number for a small fee to gain employment which allows the legal alien to create an entitlement to social security.

So if a thief steals "your car" or some other valuable, then it does not belong to you, but to society as a whole?

In the early 90's I brought my wife to the U.S.A. and although she had only a 3rd grade education and spoke only a few words of English she had no problem finding a full time job paying her $10 an hour after a couple of weeks with many American born and educated co-workers who would only work part time as they would begin to lose some government benefits if their income exceeded some pre-determined amount.

 

I don't like commenting on these posts wherein posters have to quote everything I say and try to respond to it. It's a cowardly way to interact, but here is the best response;

1) According to the Chief Actuary of the Socialist Security Administration, undocumented foreigners pay $12 BILLION DOLLARS per year into the system and are not allowed to receive benefits:

https://news.vice.com/article/unaut...billion-into-social-security-over-last-decade

IF people are misusing the system and the undocumented are getting money, and you claim to know more than me, then we'd all be willing to hear what your experiences have been with bringing suits in court to rectify the problem and force the various agencies to do their jobs

2) I don't understand your "thief" analogy, so let me give you my opinion. Rather than attack it, please give me some honest counter-argument if you disagree:

An employer creates a job. That job belongs to either the employer OR the government. It's either his job to give or the government's to dole out. Our country was built on the premise of a Right to private property. That doesn't only mean real estate. If you use the song I wrote without my permission, I can sue you, correct? Intellectual property rights? So, what about the job an employer creates? Unless you're in a socialist country, the employer owns the job he or she creates. It was never the public's job and if the employer gave it to someone else, it was theirs to give.

Now, you can fall back on that "illegal alien" argument. Unless you are supporting Ted Cruz for president, that argument is a classic fail. You know damn well how Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton feel. So, what about Donald Trump? Both Chris Christie AND Rudy Guilani have endorsed Trump and Trump has accepted (and modified his immigration stances.) Here is what they said:
U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie surprised many at a Dover church public forum when he said sneaking into the United States is not a criminal act.

"Being in this country without proper documentation is not a crime," Christie told more than 60 residents and town officials. "The whole phrase of 'illegal immigrant' connotes that the person, by just being here, is committing a crime."

Being undocumented may be a civil wrong, but it's not a criminal act, Christie said.

"Don't let people make you believe that that's a crime that the U.S. Attorney's Office should be doing something about," he added of entering the country illegally. "It is not."

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/04/immigrants_and_their_advocates.html

"It's not a crime," Giuliani said Friday. "I know that's very hard for people to understand, but it's not a federal crime."
Giuliani's comments came in an interview with CNN Headline News and radio talk-show host Glenn Beck.
"I was U.S. attorney in the Southern district of New York," he said. "So believe me, I know this. In fact, when you throw an immigrant out of the country, it's not a criminal proceeding. It's a civil proceeding."
Illegal immigration shouldn't be a crime, either, Giuliani said"..."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/07/AR2007090702066.html

Trump has said that he would build a wall, but assures us the foreigners will be allowed to return. Trump as well as anyone with an IQ above 50 realizes the wall will not be built. It will not pass constitutional muster with the Supreme Court. But, the politicians can tell you they did their best. You're whizzing in the wind to think anyone except Ted Cruz is on your side of that debate

3) Forty seven percent of the American people were dependent upon the government for their daily bread when Mitt Romney was running for president. I don't know what the figures are today. They are much higher. So, I don't understand your point with your wife - except that she is a woman, foreign, probably doesn't have a record for youthful indiscretions, and just enough luck in the right place.

 

I am offended by your words above, and feel that you need to elaborate how quoting the words you are responding to is a "cowardly way to interact."

I find it quite useful when those who respond to my posts quote my words they are responding to as it allows me to compare their response to the exact words I used, and others can then compare and evaluate the post and the response against each other without having to look elsewhere.

 

1) The article you provided claims an estimated 7 million people are currently working in the US illegally.
It also claims an estimated 3.1 million are using fake or expired social security numbers, yet also paying automatic payroll taxes.
Stephen Goss, the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration then stated that he believes that these workers pay an annual net contribution of $12 billion to the Social Security Trust Fund.
Based on the numbers above the average payroll tax deduction for each of the 3.1 million would be $3,870.97 and

And you seem to be focused primarily on "Yet as these people are in the US illegally, it is unlikely that they will be able to benefit from their contributions later in life." With the existing 12.4% social security and 2.9% Medicare tax rates, totalling 15.3% it would mean their average income would be $25,300.44 or about $12.13 per hour, or about $4.88 above the Federal minimum wage.

 

If you accept our Right to private property then I don't see how you can question who the job created by an employer actually belongs to. You appear to be arguing over something I'm inclined, from your above words, to be something on which we are in agreement.


But your previous post still leaves me a little confused:
Quote Originally Posted by TheResister View Post
My feeling is that IF undocumented foreigners are stealing "our" jobs, then the jobs do not belong to the employer, but to society as a whole.

 

I have brought NO suits to court, but I believe you might agree that it should be the responsibility of government to do so.

The phrase 'illegal immigrant' SHOULD imply that the person(s) being referred to have violated our immigration laws. Legal immigrants are persons who abided by our immigration laws on entry. An undocumented immigrant could be someone who entered the country legally but has no documented proof of his/her name, birth date, age, nationality, etc. which is the case of many of my friends who entered legally as refugees at the end of the Viet Nam war.

When we break a law we have committed an illegal act. While not coming to a full stop at a stop sign even though it may be clearly visible that there is no oncoming traffic is not a criminal act, it is illegal and can result in a ticket and a fine or possibly even worse if you are a known repeat offender.

As we do have immigration laws, they become meaningless if our government refuses to enforce them. There are legal means by which both non-citizens and citizens are to follow for entry into the U.S.A. and avoidance is illegal and not just non-citizens but citizens can and should be held accountable within our laws. I have never been able to gain re-entry into the U.S. without showing my passport and doubt seriously I would be allowed to exit the port of entry until which time I was able to obtain some proof of my citizenship or being a legal alien resident.

The term 'illegal' does not necessarily connotate one to be a criminal, felon, thief, etc. but only that one has broken a law which is an illegal act, hence the terms 'illegal immigrant' or 'illegal alien' become appropriate to use in distinguishing a law abiding from a law breaking immigrant.

 

IMO, and I am entitled to an opinion, right??? When you feel a need to quote EVERY word a poster has written and comment on them individually, it then requires twice as many paragraphs to answer every statement. Thus, my five paragraphs become ten with you responding and my twenty to counter respond. you and I know nobody is going to read such an exchange.

 

If an employer creates a job, who owns the job? The majority of Americans today believe that if the employer knowingly and willingly gives the job to a foreigner, the foreigner is "stealing" the job. They then demand that government reinforce the POLICE STATE as opposed to simply creating a Guest Worker program with no automatic path to citizenship and moving forward.

Again, welfare ought to be a privilege of citizenship and we should employ it to give people a hand up, NOT to provide a lifestyle of dependency.

 

While all of that is true in a strict, lawyerly sort of way, it is a half truth. Our immigration laws have not been updated in over 50 years. And, while they can be used as a tool to regulate immigration, they cannot be used to deny people the fundamental unalienable Right of Liberty.

The law we have right now applies to entry. It results in a maximum of $250 fine and generally deportation. That, by no standards, is an excuse to deny someone their other Rights. But I digress. This thread is about welfare and the people have to tell this government that welfare is a privilege of citizenship.

At some level, politicians use welfare as a vote buying tool. It is not intended to be used as political fodder. It is a privilege of citizenship and those on welfare ought to be expected to become self sufficient while we're giving them a hand up.

 

To a degree I agree with your last sentence.

 

I'm not sure why or how we got on to immigration in this thread either.

I agree that welfare is used as a vote buying tool, especially at the Federal level of government. But I don't see it as a privilege of citizenship beyond the State and/or local level of government, where people are able to exercise more immediate control over the politicians they elect.

 

So, do you think we ought to allow foreigners to participate in Social Security?

 

Do they have a legally obtained Social Security number? In other words, have they entered the country legally with permission to seek employment? If so, and they fulfil all requirements to receive Social Security and Medicare benefits then I don't see how or why they could legally be denied.

 

A lot of people in the U.S. without human registration papers obtained a Taxpayer Identification Number and pay into Socialist Security though not having the so - called "legal status." Socialist Security does not work unless those on it grew up here, started working at a young age, and have paid in over a course of time. So, while you are taxed, I still feel that these programs ought to be privileges of citizenship.

Guess we just have to agree to disagree on the point.

 

Give it a break. Neither party has ever made any effort to deal with illegal immigration.

 

True. So is that why the political class and media hate Trump so much because they are scared he will?

 

There Are not currently enough full time jobs for those who want one and it is only going to get worse as more and more jobs are automated.

Probably time to reconsider something like the WPA program.

 

All I was saying is that the law governing Social Security should be applied as it is written. Many of our laws may be poorly written and in need of change but politicians, once elected, tend to do what benefits their re-election most.

 

Most people seem to overestimate what a President can and cannot accomplish. There Are little things like laws, our system of three branches of gov't, and international politics that come into play.

 

People scream about crony capitalism and big money in politics but once again they'll vote for the politician who is funded by big money from big business. The politicians pander to the voter with promises to legislate their prosperity. They pander to big business behind closed doors.

Anyway, once a politician gets into office, instead of working for the people they are thinking about re-election, big campaign contributions i.e... crony capitalism. Think about the big winners during the Obama era... big banks who handle welfare and the insurance companies who thought they would get a major influx of new customers. The people (who work) lost in both cases because they either lost jobs or they are paying the bill.

So why won't Hillary release her transcripts when giving speeches to the big banks? Obviously it was ok to tape Romney and demand his tax returns by why won't the left demand that she release transcripts to big banks? What don't they want us to know?

 

Obama and his crony's pushed through Obamacare and even though he promised I will not lose my healthcare insurance I did. Even though Obama promised that our premiums would go down instead my premiums doubled. The president obviously has more power than we want to admit and they know it, that's why they are scared *hitless of Trump. I don't expect that I'll like everything, that's impossible but will he actually make a true attempt to "work for WE THE PEOPLE" instead of big banks and big companies like Hillary who is bought and paid for?

 

There are 70 million people on some sort of welfare program, not 32 million.