Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Explain to me how cutting child care for welfare to work people helps

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 10:10 AM
Original message
Explain to me how cutting child care for welfare to work people helps
please, explain it to me like i'm Bush. Please explain to me how cutting food stamps helps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 10:13 AM
Response to Original message
1. only a Repug mind could even touch that one!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. i see the gloating thread and all i can think about are those budget cuts
Edited on Fri Nov-18-05 10:14 AM by chimpsrsmarter
and i'm really distressed over them, it's so wrong. when the fuck are people going to rise up and say "Enough!!!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KyndCulture Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. Completely agree! This was AWFUL!
I watched that debate last night and their lack of anything that resembles a conscience really showed through.

The pigs want the poor people dead and gone it's obvious!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. Agreed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
3. Well Mr Bush, this is another opportunity to shrink government
We are turning back all social progress to at least 1875.

This of course is only a small step on our journey back to the feudalism of the dark ages, but it's significant. Sign the bill George. Don't ask any questions.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
4. Population control?
Starve them to death and you won't have to pay for their food and childcare. Same with what they're doing to our seniors. Let them die and we'll save SS funds. IMCPO, it's not too far-fetched when you know how those evil people think. What else could they be thinking? It DOESN'T HELP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerRepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
5. Scrooge has a line that makes sense to the 'pukes.
"Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses!? Yes! Let them die in the streets to decrease the excess population ..."

The words of Scrooge make 'pukes glow with a sense of pending accomplishment. They want to turn the world back to the times of the 'glorious industrial revolution':

"That the shameful practice of child labor should have played an important role in the Industrial Revolution from its outset is not to be wondered at. The displaced working classes, from the seventeenth century on, took it for granted that a family would not be able to support itself if the children were not employed. In Defoe's day he thought it admirable that in the vicinity of Halifax scarcely anybody above the age of 4 was idle. The children of the poor were forced by economic conditions to work, as Dickens, with his family in debtor's prison, worked at age 12 in the Blacking Factory. In 1840 perhaps only twenty percent of the children of London had any schooling, a number which had risen by 1860, when perhaps half of the children between 5 and 15 were in some sort of school, if only a day school (of the sort in which Dickens's Pip finds himself in Great Expectations) or a Sunday school; the others were working. Many of the more fortunate found employment as apprentices to respectable trades (in the building trade workers put in 64 hours a week in summer and 52 in winter) or as general servants -- there were over 120,000 domestic servants in London alone at mid-century, who worked 80 hour weeks for one halfpence per hour -- but many more were not so lucky. Most prostitutes (and there were thousands in London alone) were between 15 and 22 years of age.

Many children worked 16 hour days under atrocious conditions, as their elders did. Ineffective parliamentary acts to regulate the work of workhouse children in factories and cotton mills to 12 hours per day had been passed as early as 1802 and 1819. After radical agitation, notably in 1831, when "Short Time Committees" organized largely by Evangelicals began to demand a ten hour day, a royal commission established by the Whig government recommended in 1833 that children aged 11-18 be permitted to work a maximum of twelve hours per day; children 9-11 were allowed to work 8 hour days; and children under 9 were no longer permitted to work at all (children as young as 3 had been put to work previously). This act applied only to the textile industry, where children were put to work at the age of 5, and not to a host of other industries and occupations. Iron and coal mines (where children, again, both boys and girls, began work at age 5, and generally died before they were 25), gas works, shipyards, construction, match factories, nail factories, and the business of chimney sweeping, for example (which Blake would use as an emblem of the destruction of the innocent), where the exploitation of child labor was more extensive, was to be enforced in all of England by a total of four inspectors. After further radical agitation, another act in 1847 limited both adults and children to ten hours of work daily."

http://www.victorianweb.org/history/hist8.html

Just think of Bush as Ebeneezer Scrooge, and everyone around him as like-minded compatriots, and you'll understand their actions in totality.

Unfortunately for us, we're not living in Dickens' book, and Bush and his minions won't have a Dickensian revelation and realize the error of their ways. Perhaps a better comparison is with the ghost Marley. I can hear the chains in Washington rattling loudly...

How appropriate that their latest actions to screw the poor and needy occur near the holiday season. Democrats in Congress should greet the Republicans by putting their own words in their mouth - "Bah, humbug!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
7. I would also like them to explain how they can do these things
and,at the same time, refuse to raise minimum wage? I don't understand their logic. Is this that "compassionate conservatism" that they brag about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. it's an oxy moron. They are disgusting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hamlette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
10. its not Christian, it doesn't help
One huge problem we face (I work at the state welfare office) is they have/will increase the number of hours a recipient must work but they have/will cut our child care budget. So people have to work more hours (currently it is 34, will go to 40 under some plans) but there will be no money to help them with child care.

It's pretty much a scandal. Remember these programs are for people with dependent children. If you don't have kids, you don't get welfare and you must work for your food stamps. Hardly a "give away".

I could tell you stories. . .I recently had a mom with no car, taking kids on the bus to the only child care centers which will accept them (because of their ages, she had to use two different centers) then taking the bus to work at a minimum wage job. The commute took her 2 hours each way. She was gone 12 hours a day. Then she had to go home and try to provide quality time for her 4 kids? (One dad, he just up and left, can't find him.) This is a woman with very limited intellect so its not likely she'll ever make more than minimum wage or that we'll ever "find" the father. Sad cases. (Oh, the heartbreaker? She lost her job because she had to be there at 8 am and the first bus left at 6 and on some days she couldn't get all the connections on time and she was late. So they fired her.)

What do we do, as a society, about people like this? The GOP will just ignore "believing" that charity will take care of them. Charity does not. It can help with food on a limited basis but not housing and child care and cars on a sustained basis. Some churches do a better job than others which means you have to be a member of a church to get help in this country. That's what the GOP wants. And of course, some churches just can't help. Or don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
feelthebreeze Donating Member (570 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
11. From what I could glean last night...
The republicans believe that the assistance programs are too large and corrupt in their usage. Better to cut them down because of the inherent misuse. Of course they give no compelling evidence of this. It is so because we say it is so.
We, of course, know that today they will ramrod a tax break for the wealthy that is paid for by these cuts to needed assistance programs. This is of little surprise to me. When you are yourself a corrupted official in the cogs of the Democratic machine, then of course you are unable to see anything else as other than corrupted,(i.e. government programs) You perceive the reality through your own set of experiences and beliefs. I am corrupt therefore all is seen as corrupt.
I sat stunned last night and confused as too how the justification of this budget was seen as a good thing for America.
Yet, if you are a die hard fan of Capitalism and a social Darwinist, as these morons are, then you must believe the good and chosen ones are the ones at the top of the money chain. They are the true and chosen leaders of this Nation through their playing successfully at the accumulation game, and are therefore clearly deserving of not only of this Nations riches but its stewardship as well.
The accumulation of wealth is the standard by which all action is accomplished in D.C. When we have a system that is built upon this platform then of course, what occurred last night, is the logical endgame. I saw name calling and anger last night, but no one is pinpointing the real problem, because both sides are created from it.
And that problem is the concentration of wealth in our elected body.
We all know the right thing to do, protect our citizens from harm, yet this goes counter to what is actually occurring in our system.
It can only change if we the people reclaim back our Government. In the final analysis of power being balanced this is the ultimate need: the collected individual against the centralized power. We all need to wake up and realize that currently it is not a government of the people, for the people. If it were we would not be hurting ourselves like this. Why would we as individuals accept corruption and accumulation of wealth as our standards for governance?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ultraist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-18-05 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
12. It helps the war profiteers make more money
By funneling our tax dollars into the war and away from social programs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC