Saving state by hurting our towns

Saving state by hurting our towns

There are 36 comments on the Evening Sun story from May 28, 2011, titled Saving state by hurting our towns. In it, Evening Sun reports that:

To Sen. Richard Alloway and Reps. Dan Moul and Will Tallman: Cutting services to some of our most vulnerable citizens may solve the state budget woes, but it will impact severely on the quality of life of the people in the communities where these vulnerable citizens live - your community and mine.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Evening Sun.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Junior

Boiling Springs, PA

#21 May 29, 2011
Reader from Abbottstown wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm glad that you are interested in traveling an hour to get to work I assume you mean one way so that's at least a 10 hour day every day. Many people don't have the transportation or the finances to do that. Also I hope that you don't have a family because you are very nearly a non resident parent with little to no time to spend with your kids. That's not to mention that a single parent couldn't do that because it is extreamly hard to find any kind of childcare for the weekend.
There is no "interest" in traveling an hour each way to work. It's what I do to support my family. As far as family time, I sacrifice sleep in order to give my kids quality family time. That's the way I was raised, you work so your family has the things they need. As for being unable to afford to travel for work, that is just an excuse. You're telling me if you had to travel 30 minutes to an hour to get a job that pays 2 or 3 times what you can make locally, you wouldn't find a way to do it? Short and to the point, everyone can find excuses to not work, but reality is, why would they want to when they don't have to?

My other suggestion is put them to work. If you are collecting a paycheck from the state, you should do something to earn it. Our roads in this state suck to be blunt. These people are getting checks, train them and put them to work on the roads. Mowing, paving, trash cleanup, etc. Why can't they do something to earn their checks? Why are they not drug tested? Why should I pay for somebodys habit? I have to pass a drug test to get my job and income, why shouldn't welfare recipients? Just my opinion, but I think I have a valid point!
Curious

Hanover, PA

#22 May 29, 2011
A concerned Citizen wrote:
<quoted text>Boy, have you lost touch with reality.There are many
people out there who have not had the privileged life that you obviously have had. You are telling social service consumers to go out and get a job. Well, your head must be in the sand. There aren't many jobs available, and those that are available are either for professionals or are very low paying.Programs for children should not be cut! Children are our future. If anything, there should be more money put into programs for children.
How do you know Anonymous has had a privileged life? You just assumed that because the position that is advocated is a "help yourself" position.

I just love how you now call those on welfare, food stamps and all of the other programs which the government created to take care of people "SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS". No stigma there, why shouldn't they just continue to be consumers, just consumers who don't take care of themselves. Why take care of yourself when the government will do it for you. This policy has worked real well in Cuba and all of the other other SOCIALIST nations. Hence "social programs". Take all of the money from the government (which is collected from taxes) and give it to those who truly need it - the working poor. I've got news for you...every time there is an increase in taxes to take care of the working poor you create more of the working poor.

Where I grew up everyone in town would have been considered "working poor". Yet there was not a lot of families who were receiving aid from the government. However, with the influx of prisoner families (the town now has three prisons) there has been an serious increase of "SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS".
Curious

Hanover, PA

#23 May 29, 2011
Junior wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no "interest" in traveling an hour each way to work. It's what I do to support my family. As far as family time, I sacrifice sleep in order to give my kids quality family time. That's the way I was raised, you work so your family has the things they need. As for being unable to afford to travel for work, that is just an excuse. You're telling me if you had to travel 30 minutes to an hour to get a job that pays 2 or 3 times what you can make locally, you wouldn't find a way to do it? Short and to the point, everyone can find excuses to not work, but reality is, why would they want to when they don't have to?
My other suggestion is put them to work. If you are collecting a paycheck from the state, you should do something to earn it. Our roads in this state suck to be blunt. These people are getting checks, train them and put them to work on the roads. Mowing, paving, trash cleanup, etc. Why can't they do something to earn their checks? Why are they not drug tested? Why should I pay for somebodys habit? I have to pass a drug test to get my job and income, why shouldn't welfare recipients? Just my opinion, but I think I have a valid point!
Man are you ever spot dead on! My spouse and I also travel an hour each way to work each and every day. Would we rather work in town and sleep in until 7:00 am each morning instead of getting up at 4:45 am. You bet. But did we feel it was more necessary to send three kids to college. You bet. You do what you need to in order to take care of your family.

I 100% agree with you about those who are "SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS" being put to work in service of the state. I can't seem to quit laughing about that one. SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS. Its so ridiculous I can not even fathom someone could say that with a straight face.
A child Advocate

Shermans Dale, PA

#24 May 29, 2011
Curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Man are you ever spot dead on! My spouse and I also travel an hour each way to work each and every day. Would we rather work in town and sleep in until 7:00 am each morning instead of getting up at 4:45 am. You bet. But did we feel it was more necessary to send three kids to college. You bet. You do what you need to in order to take care of your family.
I 100% agree with you about those who are "SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS" being put to work in service of the state. I can't seem to quit laughing about that one. SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS. Its so ridiculous I can not even fathom someone could say that with a straight face.
I think you are assuming that social services pertain to only welfare recipients. Many programs fall under social services such as mental health, domestic abuse services, subsidized daycare, and early childhood programs. The people rewceiving those services are social services consumers. However, that does not mean that they are all waiting for their welfare check to come in the mail. Most social services are there to help people get back on their feet. We do need welfare reform, but please do not stereotype the people who are "consumers" of social services because many of them are receiving services other welfare handouts.
smart people

Shippensburg, PA

#25 May 29, 2011
Government is all screwed-up. If they r not lairs be4 the get in, they r cheaters and losers when there there in person collecting all the money and perks
not laughing

Shermans Dale, PA

#26 May 30, 2011
Curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Man are you ever spot dead on! My spouse and I also travel an hour each way to work each and every day. Would we rather work in town and sleep in until 7:00 am each morning instead of getting up at 4:45 am. You bet. But did we feel it was more necessary to send three kids to college. You bet. You do what you need to in order to take care of your family.
I 100% agree with you about those who are "SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS" being put to work in service of the state. I can't seem to quit laughing about that one. SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS. Its so ridiculous I can not even fathom someone could say that with a straight face.
I'm glad you think the term Social Services Consumer is funny. What about the person who loses his home to a fire and needs the assistance of the Red Cross? Is that funny? Are they a consumer of a social service? YES! Are they collecting welfare?NO! What about someone who experiences trauma in his/her life and needs some mental health assistance? Once again, they are a consumer of a social service. It does not mean that they are lazy and sit around eating bon-bons all day while you go to work.What about children who need protective services from an abusive parent? What about the elderly who need assistance from the local Agency on Aging? What about the woman who needs shelter from an abusive husband? Many times they are wealthier women who need help getting out of their situation. You seem to be ignorant of the fact that social services can mean many things. I'm glad you are having a good laugh because you never know when misfortune will fall upon you or someone you love. When it does, these social service agencies will be there to help. Do not assume that the "consumers" you are having a good laugh about are the low-life, lazy, take whatever I can get for free type of person. I agree that there are those people out there who take advantage of the traditional welfare system.However, do not laugh at those who truly need because of some misfortune. You might be next.
Something Different

Hanover, PA

#27 May 30, 2011
not laughing wrote:
<quoted text>I'm glad you think the term Social Services Consumer is funny. What about the person who loses his home to a fire and needs the assistance of the Red Cross? Is that funny? Are they a consumer of a social service? YES! Are they collecting welfare?NO! What about someone who experiences trauma in his/her life and needs some mental health assistance? Once again, they are a consumer of a social service. It does not mean that they are lazy and sit around eating bon-bons all day while you go to work.What about children who need protective services from an abusive parent? What about the elderly who need assistance from the local Agency on Aging? What about the woman who needs shelter from an abusive husband? Many times they are wealthier women who need help getting out of their situation. You seem to be ignorant of the fact that social services can mean many things. I'm glad you are having a good laugh because you never know when misfortune will fall upon you or someone you love. When it does, these social service agencies will be there to help. Do not assume that the "consumers" you are having a good laugh about are the low-life, lazy, take whatever I can get for free type of person. I agree that there are those people out there who take advantage of the traditional welfare system.However, do not laugh at those who truly need because of some misfortune. You might be next.
1) No, I am not ignorant about whatthe term social services can mean. Do you advocates of "SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS" not read well. Here is what I stated: I just love how you now call those on welfare, food stamps and all of the other programs which the government created to take care of people "SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS". You tell me how any of the programs you stated above does not fall into this category. These "SOCIAL SERVICES" are provided by the government. How? By taxing the people. By the way, out of the social service programs the taxpayers provide, what is the % that welfare and food stamps takes up of all of the programs which the government provides via taxes?

2) Is the Red Cross a "SOCIAL SERVICE" provided by the taxpayers?

The ARC is not funded by the U.S. government, functions independently of the government but works closely with government agencies, such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), during times of major crises. It is responsible for giving aid to members of the U.S. Armed Forces and to disaster victims at home and abroad. It does this through services that are consistent with its Congressional Charter and the Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement allowing the Red Cross to stay neutral and impartial.

The Red Cross is an independent, not-for-profit volunteer organization that primarily relies on people like you for support. Your donations of time and money make their work possible. In addition, to seeking individual donations...The Red Cross also solicits funding through corporations and foundations and government contracts or grants.

3) What is sad is that anyone who disagrees with the nanny state are ignorant, hate all those in need, hate children and are basically low lifes whom you personally wish a tragedy to befall despite your claim otherwise. This is a great analysis of the position.
not laughing

Shermans Dale, PA

#28 May 30, 2011
Something Different wrote:
<quoted text>
1) No, I am not ignorant about whatthe term social services can mean. Do you advocates of "SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS" not read well. Here is what I stated: I just love how you now call those on welfare, food stamps and all of the other programs which the government created to take care of people "SOCIAL SERVICE CONSUMERS". You tell me how any of the programs you stated above does not fall into this category. These "SOCIAL SERVICES" are provided by the government. How? By taxing the people. By the way, out of the social service programs the taxpayers provide, what is the % that welfare and food stamps takes up of all of the programs which the government provides via taxes?
2) Is the Red Cross a "SOCIAL SERVICE" provided by the taxpayers?
The ARC is not funded by the U.S. government, functions independently of the government but works closely with government agencies, such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), during times of major crises. It is responsible for giving aid to members of the U.S. Armed Forces and to disaster victims at home and abroad. It does this through services that are consistent with its Congressional Charter and the Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement allowing the Red Cross to stay neutral and impartial.
The Red Cross is an independent, not-for-profit volunteer organization that primarily relies on people like you for support. Your donations of time and money make their work possible. In addition, to seeking individual donations...The Red Cross also solicits funding through corporations and foundations and government contracts or grants.
3) What is sad is that anyone who disagrees with the nanny state are ignorant, hate all those in need, hate children and are basically low lifes whom you personally wish a tragedy to befall despite your claim otherwise. This is a great analysis of the position.
Can you not read well? I never wished a tragedy on anyone. I stated that when you have a need, those agencies will be there to help you or a loved one. Believe it or not, I would like to see some kind of welfare reform. Like it or not, many social service agencies are necessary. The Red Cross offers many services. Not just disaster relief. What about other agencies that help the elderly, special needs children, people in abusive situations? Have you given any thought to what would happen to those people if all social service agencies closed down? For some reason, noone seems to mind sending help to foreign countries that are faced with disaster, but when it comes to helping our own, they want to shut down the nedded agencies. I said it before, if you ever are in the position to need help, it will be there. None of us knows when there will be a tragedy in our lives.
whocares

East Berlin, PA

#29 May 30, 2011
dog1 wrote:
The Republicans would rather walk over the homeless then reach down and give them a hand to get on there feet.
That's the "trickle down effect" republicans pissing on the homeless and less fortunate.
I hope they never need assistance if they ever fall on hard times. Arent we suppose to look after each other? be our brothers keeper?
Kinda Fair

Gettysburg, PA

#30 May 30, 2011
2) Is the Red Cross a "SOCIAL SERVICE" provided by the taxpayers?
.....

I don't think I'd pick the Red Cross as an example of how charity should work. Weren't they known for "selling" donated candy bars and magazines to injured soldiers in the past? And didn't they have a big scandal over paying their CEO more than the Gettysburg Foundation wastes on theirs?

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#31 May 31, 2011
whocares wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the "trickle down effect" republicans pissing on the homeless and less fortunate.
I hope they never need assistance if they ever fall on hard times. Arent we suppose to look after each other? be our brothers keeper?
Utter nonsense.
Reader from Abbottstown

York, PA

#32 Jun 1, 2011
Junior wrote:
<quoted text>
My other suggestion is put them to work. If you are collecting a paycheck from the state, you should do something to earn it. Our roads in this state suck to be blunt. These people are getting checks, train them and put them to work on the roads. Mowing, paving, trash cleanup, etc. Why can't they do something to earn their checks? Why are they not drug tested? Why should I pay for somebodys habit? I have to pass a drug test to get my job and income, why shouldn't welfare recipients? Just my opinion, but I think I have a valid point!
Now you have said something truly noteworthy. I see no harm in what you are suggesting in this paragraph. I agree with taking what is given in government assistance, dividing it by the minimum wage and requiring the person to do work what would equil the amount of hours they would have to work at mimimum wage to get the same amount of money. But that's too easy for our government to think of. And that would mean hiring someone to oversee the work to make sure it gets done so now you have another person employed by the government.
Reader from Abbottstown

York, PA

#33 Jun 1, 2011
One thing I'm not hearing and don't understand is what sacrifices out government officials are handing to themselves. I hear no word about cuts in their wages, putting them on Social Security instead of their big taxpayer supported pension, how about their very lucritive healthcare that we pay for, and, of course, all the perks they get for just being in their elected possion. Yet they expect others to take cuts in wages, pension and insurance to balance their budget. I hear nothing about increasing revenue when the problem is as much a revenue problem as it is excessive spending. If they can't do a combination of all these things then they should be voted out and I don't care if they are Rep. or Dem.
Reader from Abbottstown

York, PA

#34 Jun 1, 2011
Jonah Hex wrote:
<quoted text>
Then start your own business.
Same comment as before. You need money to do that and most people don't have the money to do that and the banks aren't lending it like they once did.
Get real.
Reader from Abbottstown

York, PA

#35 Jun 1, 2011
Penn wrote:
<quoted text>My father traveled just as far to a job that barley paid and he was a single parent. It can be done, it stinks but it can be done if someone pushes themselves and doesn't let distance be a impedment to a job to see that his family is taken care of. In short he put his family ahead of himself.
I didn't travel an hour or more to work but I did make sacrifices for my family as you did. And I'm not saying that people shouldn't do that. I worked many long hours when I was raisling kids and made good money. My wife also worked to help with finances. Yes, I messed some things my kids were doing but most of the time I was there. I made college available to both my kids and later a step child. So don't tell me about sacrifice but there are people that can't do such jobs due to lack of transportation or perhaps skills to do such jobs. Not everyone is a college grad that can get a high paying job. I was lucky by being a skilled tradesman thanks to ojt which is also almost nonexistant these days. And, by the way, I recently had a relitive that graduated from Cornel U. and only 30% of his classmates had jobs to go to so even a good education doesn't guarentee you a job these days.

“ROCK ON ROCKERS!!”

Since: Mar 11

Rockin' USA ;)

#36 Jun 1, 2011
Reader from Abbottstown wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't travel an hour or more to work but I did make sacrifices for my family as you did. And I'm not saying that people shouldn't do that. I worked many long hours when I was raisling kids and made good money. My wife also worked to help with finances. Yes, I messed some things my kids were doing but most of the time I was there. I made college available to both my kids and later a step child. So don't tell me about sacrifice but there are people that can't do such jobs due to lack of transportation or perhaps skills to do such jobs. Not everyone is a college grad that can get a high paying job. I was lucky by being a skilled tradesman thanks to ojt which is also almost nonexistant these days. And, by the way, I recently had a relitive that graduated from Cornel U. and only 30% of his classmates had jobs to go to so even a good education doesn't guarentee you a job these days.
Cut this, cut that, but are the big whigs taking a cut??? heck freakin' no way!! They still have their kids in private schools, gala events to attend and an allowance. Do you really think it matters to them,really what is cut and not? ROCK ON!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Hanover Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Snyder's of Hanover (Aug '09) 1 hr I b o suckered no... 5,788
Snyder lance May 25 Torts 3
Review: Dean's Auto Plaza (Sep '13) May 7 Scott123 10
News 12-time DUI repeater gets up to 7 years in prison (Sep '08) Apr 30 Trista Biddle 23
News Half Pint Creamery plans second ice cream shop Mar '15 Fannie Pak 2
Second eagle Mar '15 Vlossak 1
Rachel Caltrider????? Mar '15 Just looking 1
More from around the web

Hanover People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]