- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
Babies: 3 - 6 Months
Hyfagal
member
Another UO
Hyfagal
member
In general I hate Medicaid and government assistance programs. I think they've made being a lazy, greedy slob an acceptable lifestyle for many.
Of course there are true cases where people are using them the way they were designed so I get annoyed when anyone makes a statement about them and a gaggle of people are all "How dare you!"
If you're using them correctly you have nothing to defend yourself against. I don't judge you for needing help. If you're using them for fvck you money I hope my statements make you feel the shame needed to get defensive.
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Another UO
I'm pretty sure this is a PO!
And yet, I would still greatly prefer my tax dollars go to this rather than to giving more tax breaks to rich people and oil companies.
TTC #2 since 8/2012
Me:28 H:34
Me: all tests normal!
H: Azoospermia (Sperm count zero).
MFI Urologist all test normal.
Biopsy Feb. 14
****EVERYONE WELCOME****
I just don't understand why there can't ever be a conversation with this mentioned that doesn't turn into "no skittles for poor people" Eat your skittles, just don't avoid getting married but live with your baby daddy and lie on forms so you get a check for booze, cigs, and acrylic nails every month. Mkay.
I agree with this... I do feel, however, that we would be better off as a country with a single-payer healthcare system. I feel that healthcare is a right but spending money is a privilege if that makes sense to anyone but me.
One of my UO's a couple weeks back is I don't believe sweets or overly sugary/prepared foods should be available on food stamps. If the government is gonna give you money for food, for the love of god, don't sped it on twinkies >_> My fiance manages a grocery store and at least a dozen times a day he sees people buy entire carts full of junk food ad pay for them with food stamps, it disgusts me.
Ah, totally agree.
We have a good friend who is a firefighter. He always says, if he needs to be drug tested so he can work for money from the state, anyone who is receiving it for free should be tested as well. Makes sense to me!
In general, most of the people that I know are on Medicaid are freeloaders by their own admittance so my opinion is based on my experiences.
I agree with this COMPLETELY (just not the drug testing bit:)
And they should be given birth control.
I mostly agree that freeloaders are a big problem, but I also think there's a huge difference between using something like temporary Medicaid for pregnancy or something emergent and being a perpetual Food Stamp recipient or receiving cash monthly for things you don't really need. I like the idea of us helping each other when we need it, but ITA there is rampant abuse of the system and those who don't really need it or who are perfectly capable of supporting themselves too often get benefits they don't deserve.
But sometimes sh!t happens, and I think it's important that assistance is there when needed. That's why I think it should be a royal PITA to get approved for any government assistance, which includes drug testing, in my opinion, along with home checks (to see who really lives in your household) and more regular check-ins. Sure, it'd require more resources up front, but I think it'd end up saving more money in the long run PLUS it would push people to be more self-sufficient when they got kicked off the programs. But the scum bags out there would find ways to cheat that, too.
I shouldn't have to pay for their BC! Bahaha j/k I love PP.
I understand the reasoning behind this. However, it would probably cost more money to implement than it would save in catching druggies.
Lol. That would totally be the argument against it. But I'd rather pay for their birth control than their 5 extra kids!
I'm on disability, I actually had to fill out a sh!t ton of paper work to NOT get medicaid. It took 3 years for me to get disability, I had paid more then enough in, every doctor I had said I couldn't return to work and because of all the fraud and freeloaders it took forever for me to be approved.
I could be on medicaid, I choose not to be because H makes enough, and has good benefits, I don't need to be taking that assistance, because I'm on disability I can also get food stamps, I don't take that either.
I both agree and disagree with you Hyfa.
THIS!!! Also if this were to happen then maybe that people that really needed the part time assistance would be able to get it rather then be turned down.
I agree that they system as it is has made it VERY easy to abuse and that in itself drains a lot of the funds. I could just be reading this wrong and I know you'll correct me if I am (Molls has gone on a sleep strike so I'm hardly capable;e of reading) but it seems like you would like to see most if not all of government hesitance programs cut, I just don't agree with that. I'm a bit of a socialist at heart at least in places where it works wonderfully like most Scandinavian countries.
I'm pretty sure that whole thought is an incoherent mess.
An alarming number of my H's extended family have mastered the fine art of sucking off the gov'mint teet.
His aunts/uncles/cousins are more than capable of working...they just choose not to. Admitedly chose not to. One of H's uncles told me he was "allergic" to work. One cousin just quit her job because she found the requiement of being ON TIME too taxing.
Not only do they get assistance, but they come to us for money...at least one family member a month. I'm meaner than DSS, though. If you can find the cash for a $2000 flat screen and a brand new Kinect, you can scrape together enough money for your own damn rent.
DH and I argue about this all the time...he feels obligated to help because they are "family"....I say they are adults who've made their own choices.
No not at all. I think they have their place and I'm glad that people have that assistance when they need it. I am just so frustrated by what it has become to so many people and the stigma of being a freeloader is fading.
A friend from highschool that I bumped into at the OB office told me that she found out two weeks before her trip to Jamaica that she was pregnant so they canceled their wedding (still went to Jamaica) so she could stay on medicaid. She and her "husband" own a house and live a comfortable life but because she's a "single" mother and works minimal hours she gets monthly checks.
I see your point, but I really don't see it as a way to catch drug users. I look at it like this....lots of people are required to be drug tested by their place of employment, and if they test positive, then they are fired. Why shouldn't people being supported by taxpayer dollars be held to the same standard? If you are receiving welfare then you should be clean. If you have money to spend on drugs then you don't need my money to supply you with food stamps.
I'm late to the party, but I mostly agree with Hyfa. When H and I went to the Health Dept to get DS's birth certificate, the line for food stamps and WIC was hella long- and you bet your azz that 70% of those in line were wearing expensive name-brand clothing and lots of gold. Very few were legitimately poor-looking. BUT, I also know a few young Airmen who are single parents that do actually need the assistance because a gov't paycheck is not always a fat one; especially if you're low on the totem pole. I qualify for both WIC and food stamps at my level of pay-- but I don't claim either because I stand fine on my own feet- and that's with a baby on formula and an H who's a SAHD. We're a single-income family but we do great with what we have.
Another requirement for those on gov't assistance should be finance/budgeting classes. Several in succession, like once a month. Participation would be mandatory and aid would shut off if the person missed 2 classes. Harsh? Methinks not.
This is MO, and based off of people I've known in gov't aid programs.
I agree with wanting them to get drug tested. However, if you pay for their assistance, obviously you'll pay for their drug testing. So you're adding a HUGE amount of money that won't be paid by the people being tested, who apparently don't have the money.
After being in the county building today, the majority of the people on the "WIC side" looked ragged and almost disgusting, and not wearing name brands and everything that pp mentioned. And don't get me started on the lady from my story in the OU thread earlier. If you need it, great. I'm all for it. But like pp said, make it so they can only buy certain things. Fruits, vegetables, all the stuff you really need to make healthy choices. Not the iced coffees and the twinkies. There has to be set limits.
And if I'm not mistaken, even if you're not married but living with your SO, you're still required to add their income when you apply. A coworker of mine who is not married to her SO was made to add him, and she didn't qualify anymore. Although she doesn't have any children. So just omitting them is still being fraudulent.
Breleigh & Mason
THANK YOU! A response that's not "no skittles for poor people." In all honesty it just baffles me that the government is trying to address the rising obesity rate yet they front the bill for tons of people to go to the grocery store and pay for entire carts of junk on government assistance. I think in the long run it'd end up being a ton cheaper because a lot of times the healthy choices tend to be a lot less expensive. A box of whole wheat crackers here runs about the same as a bag of cheetos, and lasts a whole lot longer, especially if you top them with stuff such as tuna salad etc, which are a whole lot better than a lot of the junk I see go through the grocery checkout.