coffee

Niles, MI

#1 Jun 22, 2010
Ok lets sit at home and make babies so we can collect welfare.

Oh, you see my nice car outside?

Do you work?
No!

I collect welfare.
Well how the hell do you have a nicer car than me and I work?

Sorry, but this a huge problem for me. I'm sick of supporting these lazy ass people. Sure there are some people who need welfare. Even those people shouldn't bring kids into this world if they cant afford them!

Why the hell should these people live for at least 18 years of their child's life on my dime? Or your dime for that matter?

How about if you have a kid, you afford it or you cant have kids. Welfare is out of control.

Come on now, little babies aren't eating huge steaks and crab legs. Hell, I'm not eating that stuff. I cant afford to, but welfare folks sure can, on OUR dime!

It really makes me sick. I love America, but I am disgusted with how the government runs things.

Our government is worries about silly shit, or how can we control, or what gays do. Im not gay but; WHO THE HELL CARES WHAT GAY FOLKS DO ASSHOLES!!! THIS IS AMERICA, get your shit straight American government fools!
Be careful

United States

#2 Jun 22, 2010
I care what gays do! I don't want them in the military like the libs do. Who do these people think they are? Gays have no right to defend our country. I hope they are all kicked out of the military.
well then

Palos Hills, IL

#3 Jun 22, 2010
At least they wouldn't get knocked up and go on welfare.

“Trust me?”

Since: Jan 10

Oak Forest/Midlothian

#4 Jun 22, 2010
well then wrote:
At least they wouldn't get knocked up and go on welfare.
FYI, Cook County offers free fertility treatment including artificial insemination. They say they have to offer it, because a person with insurance is entitled to it. My wife a few years ago was at a doctors office and the person next to her said she had the best insurance, and then when asked for her card, it was a state welfare card...She even told my wife she wanted a half white baby, so thats what the county gave her. Great system?
wow

Titus, AL

#5 Jun 22, 2010
sad case wrote:
<quoted text>FYI, Cook County offers free fertility treatment including artificial insemination. They say they have to offer it, because a person with insurance is entitled to it. My wife a few years ago was at a doctors office and the person next to her said she had the best insurance, and then when asked for her card, it was a state welfare card...She even told my wife she wanted a half white baby, so thats what the county gave her. Great system?
Oh no. A government insurance program that unlike private insurers, does not fight every claim tooth and nail. It is a real travesty. She has insurance and she has a legitimate medical issue, so she got fertility treatment, what is the problem? What do you want them to run a credit check on the lady to make sure you can afford the kid? Can anyone truly afford a kid in this economy. You really can't see the forest from the trees when someone tells you that government insurance is not all that bad can you? I guess that would interfere with your Rand Paul world view.

Sad case, quit playing the dummy card for the masses. You are libertarian, and I think you know where the real waste in our government is.

“Trust me?”

Since: Jan 10

Oak Forest/Midlothian

#6 Jun 22, 2010
wow wrote:
<quoted text>Oh no. A government insurance program that unlike private insurers, does not fight every claim tooth and nail. It is a real travesty. She has insurance and she has a legitimate medical issue, so she got fertility treatment, what is the problem? What do you want them to run a credit check on the lady to make sure you can afford the kid? Can anyone truly afford a kid in this economy. You really can't see the forest from the trees when someone tells you that government insurance is not all that bad can you? I guess that would interfere with your Rand Paul world view.
Sad case, quit playing the dummy card for the masses. You are libertarian, and I think you know where the real waste in our government is.
A welfare mother, getting artificially inseminated by the county? And you think that is right? You need to get out of the jungle. Single unwed mom having more kids, not only do our tax dollars pay for this, but then she gets even more once the kid is born. This state needs to follow Wisconsin's example, but then they would just move to another state like they fled Wisconsin.
well then

Palos Hills, IL

#7 Jun 22, 2010
sad case wrote:
<quoted text>FYI, Cook County offers free fertility treatment including artificial insemination. They say they have to offer it, because a person with insurance is entitled to it. My wife a few years ago was at a doctors office and the person next to her said she had the best insurance, and then when asked for her card, it was a state welfare card...She even told my wife she wanted a half white baby, so thats what the county gave her. Great system?
As scarey as it sounds you might be right, but how on earth does someone actually want to obtain a frozen pop from the county? And a multicolored frozen pop at that! Years ago the state would not pay for circumcision. No wonder the state is broke ( and full of crazy people)!
that is insane

Midlothian, IL

#8 Jun 22, 2010
I am shocked, well, in a way, that the county would pay for fertility treatments. I have a friend who went through many treatments and they are not cheap at all. Yes, they may be offered, but not all insurance companies COVER them, and less cover them at 100%. If this is true, this is wrong on so many levels. If you need to be on state insurance, you have no business trying to have more children, whom of which will be on state insurance also. My child got rejected for private insurance twice because she had surgery at 2 months old and a $250 preventative ultrasound was rejected from our insurance company. My husband worked with a man who lived in a $400,000 house and his whole family supposedly got free medical care, his wife just coming off a major surgery on our dime. Yet we have paid over $1100 a month so our children could have medical coverage. Just medical, not including dental and vision, which welfare recipients probably get free also.
None of this is right. Oh, and, when I inquired about the allkids insurance program for my children for just a 3 month time period, I was told they couldn't get it because they had to be uninsured for a year before qualifying. Really? The state is going to make CHILDREN go uninsured in order to provide insurance at a later time for them? Who wins there? Surely not the children.
Some of this may be off topic a bit, but I completely disagree with the way this state's welfare system is run. Those of us who work and are honest and don't choose to cheat the system are in debt beyond belief, even with insurance. But go on welfare and you don't have to worry about paying your bills or how much of your hospital stay will be covered. My father spent a week in ICU and worried everyday how much everything would cost and be covered. He is getting bills almost daily. If he wasn't so honest and hardworking he would have gone on welfare and had not a care in the world about being financially or morally responsible. That's the difference, some of us are simply, responsible and have ETHICS and MORALS! Some people don't have a problem being low lives living off someone else.
What is Wisconsin's welfare policy?
a lesson

Columbus, IN

#9 Jun 22, 2010
that is insane wrote:
I am shocked, well, in a way, that the county would pay for fertility treatments. I have a friend who went through many treatments and they are not cheap at all. Yes, they may be offered, but not all insurance companies COVER them, and less cover them at 100%. If this is true, this is wrong on so many levels. If you need to be on state insurance, you have no business trying to have more children, whom of which will be on state insurance also. My child got rejected for private insurance twice because she had surgery at 2 months old and a $250 preventative ultrasound was rejected from our insurance company. My husband worked with a man who lived in a $400,000 house and his whole family supposedly got free medical care, his wife just coming off a major surgery on our dime. Yet we have paid over $1100 a month so our children could have medical coverage. Just medical, not including dental and vision, which welfare recipients probably get free also.
None of this is right. Oh, and, when I inquired about the allkids insurance program for my children for just a 3 month time period, I was told they couldn't get it because they had to be uninsured for a year before qualifying. Really? The state is going to make CHILDREN go uninsured in order to provide insurance at a later time for them? Who wins there? Surely not the children.
Some of this may be off topic a bit, but I completely disagree with the way this state's welfare system is run. Those of us who work and are honest and don't choose to cheat the system are in debt beyond belief, even with insurance. But go on welfare and you don't have to worry about paying your bills or how much of your hospital stay will be covered. My father spent a week in ICU and worried everyday how much everything would cost and be covered. He is getting bills almost daily. If he wasn't so honest and hardworking he would have gone on welfare and had not a care in the world about being financially or morally responsible. That's the difference, some of us are simply, responsible and have ETHICS and MORALS! Some people don't have a problem being low lives living off someone else.
What is Wisconsin's welfare policy?
Seems to me your statement proves how the for profit insurance companies are so busy gouging people to cover their overhead that many don't even cover fertility treatments.

Medicaid is also one of the only insurance programs that cover medical marijuana. My sister used to have to pay some exorbitant amount of money (due to it not being covered as prescription despite her doctor's advice and legal medical marijuana card form the state of Michigan) for her glaucoma treatment until it actually got so bad it was affecting her vision and she was suddenly eligible for medicaid.

I am glad that for once that the feds didn't stick their noses in the states business and allowed my sister to get her prescription.

“Trust me?”

Since: Jan 10

Oak Forest/Midlothian

#10 Jun 22, 2010
Welfare reform in Wisconsin began with one simple premise: Every person is capable of doing something. The challenge for government is to help people go from doing nothing to doing something. If we are going to invest money as a society or as a state to help poor families, it makes sense to invest it in ways that will help them enter the workforce and become self-sufficient-instead of sending checks out once a month and in effect just walking away from their needs. To me, the latter is not compassion. Expecting nothing in return and offering no real help is hardly compassionate. That is apathy.
When we first started working on reforming welfare in Wisconsin, I invited individual mothers on welfare to visit the executive residence. You can imagine how somebody from a poor neighborhood might feel being invited to the governor's mansion in Madison and sitting down with the governor to talk about personal problems. I do this on a regular basis because I enjoy inviting them to the executive residence for lunch. Why? I wanted to know straight from those who were on welfare why they were on welfare.
We found their answers to be very simple, yet very profound. They wanted to work-something I always had believed was the case-but they were concerned about being unable to afford health care for their children, to obtain quality child care, and to find transportation to and from their jobs. They could not afford to pay for these necessities on their own, especially for health care. So they stayed on welfare as a means to care for their families.
From these meetings and from related research, we began to understand how government could help these families become self-sufficient. The solution was not simply to hand them a check to cash and walk away. The solution was developing meaningful programs that could support them in their struggle for independence-programs for child care, health care, job search assistance, and transportation. The solution was to provide these programs as a ladder to help them climb out of poverty and off welfare. So we immediately started shifting resources to these areas.
The next step we took was obvious yet unprecedented: We began to expect something in return from the people we were helping, not the least of which was evidence that they were taking on personal responsibility for their own improvement and for their families. Wisconsin was going to expect the people it helped to get up in the morning and go to work! It was a radical notion: Get up in the morning, get the kids ready for school or child care, go to work on time, earn a paycheck, and support your family-ultimately without any reliance on the government for help. If Wisconsin was going to offer them a ladder, then we would require them to use the ladder.
These simple principles formed the foundation for all of Wisconsin's welfare reforms over the past decade. And they serve as the foundation of the new "W2" program, Wisconsin's replacement for the old welfare system, that will be in place shortly.
Perhaps the greatest lesson America has learned from the failed welfare system is that giving something for nothing does not work. Welfare does not help a person lead a better life, and it does not help a person get out of poverty. As we worked to reform the welfare system in Wisconsin, we found that we could not rely on hoping to find any "silver bullets." There weren't any. So we set in motion a series of innovative programs based on very basic principles.

“Trust me?”

Since: Jan 10

Oak Forest/Midlothian

#11 Jun 22, 2010
Learn Fare
Our reforms started with a program we called Learn Fare, which was based on the simple principle that children should be in school. That doesn't seem too outlandish, does it? But the government was giving welfare families a check for every member of the family and it was not expecting anything from them in return. So I decided that, if Wisconsin's taxpayers were going to give welfare recipients a check for each of their children, then at least those children should have to stay in school. Again, nothing too radical; it was just plain common sense. If we were going to have any chance to break the generational cycle of welfare dependence, then we needed to make sure that Wisconsin's children could at least graduate from high school, and then give them the opportunity to go even further.
So if a child did not attend school regularly, Learn Fare reduced a family's welfare check. If a child missed three days of school during one month, the next month we deducted that portion from the welfare check.
Learn Fare was not a popular program. It really shook up the system, the status quo. The liberals went wild. They said, "How can you expect Johnny and Susie to go to school?" Can you imagine the reaction that you would have gotten when you were growing up if you had walked down to the breakfast table and announced you weren't going to school? Now liberals were telling us we were supposed to let children drop out and even pay them to skip school? I was determined to change that.

“Trust me?”

Since: Jan 10

Oak Forest/Midlothian

#12 Jun 22, 2010
Learn Fare has been quite successful, even though our critics like to point to studies that claim "There's no `discernible evidence' that Learn Fare is reducing welfare caseloads." All we know in Wisconsin is that, since we instituted Learn Fare, the dropout rates in Milwaukee schools are lower than they have been in 11 years. In fact, the state's dropout rate, at 2.4 percent, is one of the lowest in the nation, if not the lowest. More teen-aged parents in the Learn Fare program stayed in school than teen-aged parents who were not in Learn Fare. And our welfare rolls keep going down all across the state, including in Milwaukee. Is Learn Fare the sole reason for these successes? No, but it certainly is a major contributor. Learn Fare just makes basic common sense.
Children First
Another early program we instituted in Wisconsin was called Children First. I really liked this program because I have no tolerance for deadbeat parents. I set up this program to give people who are not paying their required child support a basic choice: either pay your child support or go to jail.
And what happened when we got these deadbeat parents into court? They would tell the judge, "Oh, Your Honor, I'll take option number one...but I don't have a job." So the judge would lay out the big picture for them: "Okay," the judge would respond, "you've got 16 weeks to serve for your non-pay status. You'll have to rake leaves on the court house lawn, be a crossing guard, be a teacher's aide, clean out the classrooms, clean out the brush, sweep the streets." And do you know what happened? In about ten days, like manna from heaven, the deadbeat dad had found a job and shortly thereafter had even started paying child support.
This is not rocket science; it is just basic common sense. Through this one program, Wisconsin was able to increase child support collections. We are now either the first or second-best state in the country in payment of child support. But I am not satisfied, and we are getting tougher all the time. Children First is an important step forward in an effort to require parents to stay in contact with their children and to support their children.
The lack of parental and family responsibility among those on the welfare rolls was the next problem to tackle. So we now require the parent that does not have custody of the child to participate in parenting classes.
Work First
But the problems go further. Incredibly, the welfare system actually penalized two young parents, especially teenagers, if they got married and both had jobs. If you got married, you couldn't receive welfare, but whether you lived together or apart, if you did not get married, you could receive Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). If a young mother stayed single, she could get welfare, but if she married the father of her child, they wouldn't receive AFDC even if the husband didn't have any work experience. It was illogical. Naturally, they would choose to stay apart, so their families did not become self-sufficient. To this day, I cannot understand that approach at all. So we looked for ways to change it.
We designed Work First specifically to address this problem. Work First steered welfare applicants into jobs instead of onto welfare. It provided job search assistance and even personal financial planning. There are a lot of people who just need basic help with their personal finances or finding a job and staying afloat. Work First tried to provide that help up front by providing options to welfare. This program has removed the disincentives in the welfare system that discouraged young couples from marrying and both working.
a lesson

Columbus, IN

#14 Jun 22, 2010
Are any of these posts your original thoughts?

“Trust me?”

Since: Jan 10

Oak Forest/Midlothian

#15 Jun 22, 2010
You asked for what Wisconsin did, I posted much of it, then posted the link where it came from....What else do you want me to do, post the entire law? there is a reason why our state is broke...its called migration to better lands..
that is insane

Midlothian, IL

#16 Jun 23, 2010
thanks for posting about wisconsin, interesting and worth looking up and reading. i completely agree that people need to take responsibility for themselves and not just expect free stuff just because. thanks again for the info.

5yr Midlo Resident

Since: Apr 09

Midlothian, IL

#17 Jun 23, 2010
Gee. Such a simple thought yet why can't all the states get it together? Not every person on welfare WANTS to work. Some have just decided it's easier to do nothing since nothing is expected of them.

I had people when I was recruiting tell me they needed part time and no more than $9/10 per hour because they'd lose their section 8 and free insurance. This was a very common occurrence. They were also lousy employees much of the time because they wanted to be let go. It's very sad indeed.
Hello

Jackson, GA

#18 Jun 23, 2010
5yr Midlo Resident wrote:
Gee. Such a simple thought yet why can't all the states get it together? Not every person on welfare WANTS to work. Some have just decided it's easier to do nothing since nothing is expected of them.
I had people when I was recruiting tell me they needed part time and no more than $9/10 per hour because they'd lose their section 8 and free insurance. This was a very common occurrence. They were also lousy employees much of the time because they wanted to be let go. It's very sad indeed.
5 year, I find this subject really interesting, because I am embarrassingly in the same position as you mentioned in lieu of stipulations in the Illinois unemployment benefits. I however am no slacker despite the fact that I do not wish to work more than 25 hours a week. I have kids to feed, so despite the fact that I feel guilty about it, I have to do what puts food on my plate. The fact is that I will have less time to re-educate myself (I am in school), have less time to to watch my kids (which means no babysitter money), and most importantly, I will have less money with which to feed my kids. I am searching for a job that paid close to the same level of pay, but it is very difficult. So, why should I sacrifice my Unemployment benefits by working full time when it means that there will really negative consequences for my family? Not trying to start a fight, but I thought you mentioned before that you were also receiving unemployment benefits, thus my inquisition.

Have a nice day and good luck with the job search if in fact you are still looking.

“Trust me?”

Since: Jan 10

Oak Forest/Midlothian

#19 Jun 23, 2010
Hello wrote:
<quoted text>5 year, I find this subject really interesting, because I am embarrassingly in the same position as you mentioned in lieu of stipulations in the Illinois unemployment benefits. I however am no slacker despite the fact that I do not wish to work more than 25 hours a week. I have kids to feed, so despite the fact that I feel guilty about it, I have to do what puts food on my plate. The fact is that I will have less time to re-educate myself (I am in school), have less time to to watch my kids (which means no babysitter money), and most importantly, I will have less money with which to feed my kids. I am searching for a job that paid close to the same level of pay, but it is very difficult. So, why should I sacrifice my Unemployment benefits by working full time when it means that there will really negative consequences for my family? Not trying to start a fight, but I thought you mentioned before that you were also receiving unemployment benefits, thus my inquisition.
Have a nice day and good luck with the job search if in fact you are still looking.
Unemployment is much different then welfare. If you are collecting unemployment you must have worked. This is about people who have never worked and just want to leach off the system.
Hello

Jackson, GA

#20 Jun 23, 2010
sad case wrote:
<quoted text> Unemployment is much different then welfare. If you are collecting unemployment you must have worked. This is about people who have never worked and just want to leach off the system.
I understand that, but the same logic applies because you really can't make a sweeping generalization about EVERYONE on welfare, so I am just sympathetic to the fact that the way the system works, it might not be in the best interest of someones children to work more than X amount of hours a week. Sure, those that abuse the system are usually the ones getting all the attention, but that is just the nature of the beast. Honestly, I am on an extension now, so my own and my former employers contributions have dried up. I am really just getting welfare in a different package because the checks are on the government's dime now anyway. I'm not proud, but I'm not embarrassed.

5yr Midlo Resident

Since: Apr 09

Midlothian, IL

#21 Jun 23, 2010
Hello you're not on the same page as me. These people did not go to school nor want to. They did not keep searching for better paying jobs in the interim. They WANTED to STAY ON WELFARE. Period. End of story.

Your situation is MUCH different, and that's why I specifically stated that I was talking about ones that didn't want off welfare and saw it as a meal ticket not a stepping stone.

And yes I am looking, and thank you!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Midlothian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
library discontent 2 hr BARRY O 3
Thunder over Midlothian 7 hr a joke 12
Censorship 11 hr Trump 1
A cowardly excuse for a man Tue taxpayer 26
Racist Midlothian Mon umm yeah 71
Recall Rybak Mon Gman 24
Looking for District 228 parents (May '15) Jun 26 Concerned 14

Midlothian Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Midlothian Mortgages