The Audacity Of Hope!

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
Post Reply
User avatar
dales
Posts: 10922
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:13 am
Location: SF Bay Area - NORTH California - USA

The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by dales »

Schwarzenegger bans welfare cards at casinos


Thursday, June 24, 2010




(06-24) 17:43 PDT Sacramento, Calif. (AP) --

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has issued an executive order barring California welfare recipients from using state-issued debit cards at casino ATMs.

Thursday's order followed a report by The Los Angeles Times that found CalWORKS cards were used to withdraw cash in more than half the casinos in the state.

The newspaper reported Thursday that welfare recipients have withdrawn more than $1.8 million in taxpayer cash at casinos since October.

Schwarzenegger's order requires welfare recipients to sign a pledge that they will use their benefits only to meet the basic needs of their families.

It also gives the state Department of Social Services seven days to come up with a plan to reduce other "waste, fraud and abuse" in the welfare program.


How about kicking these damned leeches off the program?

Precious tax dollars could be used for people who really need a break, instead it is pissed away on these ne'erdowells.....They must not be hurting too much if they can blow thei welfare checks on gambling.

Give them vouchers for food, NORPLANT 'em and send them on down the road.....when it rains hand out tents and ponchoes.

Your collective inability to acknowledge this obvious truth makes you all look like fools.


yrs,
rubato

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Lord Jim »

Now watch the ACLU and other "advocacy groups" come sweeping in to say how this is impermissible discrimination and violates their "rights"....
ImageImageImage

Big RR
Posts: 14897
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Big RR »

I don't have any problems with stopping the caisnos from issuing cash on the cards so long as there are other banks, etc., that will do so for those holding them.

Re the pledge, I do have a problem because it is fairly ambiguous, while I thin casinos are not a basic need, what is a basic need to one family may not be to another. I'd hate to see someone penalized for using the funds for something they perceived as a basic need, that someone else (or the state) would not see that way. Indeed, if you want to ensure compliance, why issue money at all, vouchers would make better sense.

User avatar
The Hen
Posts: 5941
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:56 am

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by The Hen »

You will always get people using their money for things other than what they should use their money for.

I do find it deplorable to think of people wasting their money on such an illogical pursuit.

They should give heir welfare money to me.

I may even offer better odds on return of your money than a poker machine.
Bah!

Image

User avatar
Gimcrack
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 12:26 am
Location: Minnesota

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Gimcrack »

There may be one valid reason for people using casinos for withdrawing money - many ATM's charge for withdrawing money. Casinos usually do not (more money to go on the table or in the machines). The EBT (Electronic Benefit card) system is far better than when they would mail a check and food stamps. Go cash the check and no one would know where the money went and people would sell their food stamps for cash. With an EBT card, the state can track where the funds are. In order for many grocery stores to accept the EBTfor food stamps, they need to have a computerized system that will differentiate eligible items from ineligible. Mom and Pop shops can't scam the state by taking food stamps for cigarettes. It sucks that it took so long for them to figure out that there may be an issue. Some states have their EBT cards set to not work across state lines. Maybe California needs to extend that to casinos (but if the casino is tribal - have fun with THAT!)

[rant]
And, as often occurs in threads about welfare, there is a perception that people on welfare are the dregs of society, doing nothing but spawning to get even more gubbermint green. Under PRWORA, ALL states have to have time limits. Yes, some people are excluded from the boot by nature of medical and/or mental issued, but it is no longer a lifetime sponge program.

We all make bad choices in life. I chose to have a kid when I was still in college, not married, yadda yadda. I did the whole welfare thing for 10 months. Know what? Like many who are on welfare, I worked before I had to go on the dole, and after a whole 10 months of spending time with TheAngel, I again became a contributing member of society. I have paid a HELL of a lot more in than I used [Lessee, $437/mo * 10 months = $4370. IIRC, I reveived no more than $120/mo in food stamps, so add another $1200...].

Now I work with many clients on welfare, most due to circumstance not through intent. The VAST majority don't think welfare is a lifestyle. It's a liferaft when necessary.
Where am I, and why am I holding a handbasket?

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33646
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Gob »

Wow!! Well that shot the shit out of the use of EBT at casinos, well done.

I've been on benefits myself twice in my life, and did not enjoy it greatly. However I have two sisters, and know of many, many, many more people who have made careers of it. (Though this would seem to be more UK phenomena than a US one.)

The trouble is Gimcrack that its the few who give the many the bad reputation.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Lord Jim »

many ATM's charge for withdrawing money. Casinos usually do not (more money to go on the table or in the machines).
Well, I've never been to an Indian Casino, but in the Casino's I've been to in Vegas, (as recently as a couple of years ago) the ATM machines charge the same $2.00-$3.00 fees per withdrawal as anywhere else...
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Gimcrack
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 12:26 am
Location: Minnesota

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Gimcrack »

All the casinos here in Minnesota are tribal. I can't say that they all do not charge transaction fees, but many do not.

Gob - the supposed cushy life of a Welfare Queen is still (obviously) the meme. It HAS changed here. After posing here I read the other thread with the BMW's, wii's, gingers everywhere and shuddered. The housing assistance there versus Section 8 here? Like comparing lemons and turnips. There are no special cash benefits for having a disabled child. As noted above, one child is still $437/mo (16 years after I was on the dole - it has not changed a penny). You are expected to be in a job training program or school, unless you have medical issues. Daycare assistance (sliding fee, not paid to the client, paid to the child care provider) is available on a sliding fee; however, thanks to budget cuts there can be up to a year wait. Section 8 housing (paid to the landlord by the government, with the renter chipping in on a sliding fee) has easily a 2 year waiting list and (trust me) you do not want to live in a Section 8 building.
Where am I, and why am I holding a handbasket?

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33646
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Gob »

Then, my friend, you will forgive me if I rail against the dole scroungers of the UK, and not take it that I extrapolate the phenomena across the pond. :)
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by rubato »

The newspaper reported Thursday that welfare recipients have withdrawn more than $1.8 million in taxpayer cash at casinos since October.
Nothing. Such a minuscule fraction that it amounts to pure hot air. The kind of story which is repeated purely to whip up anger in stupid people and distract them from things which really do make a difference.

There were 1.4 million CalWorks recipients as of Dec 2009 (78% of whom were children) so this amounts to $1.29 per recipient. CalWorks is distributing $7,000,000,000 (seven billion dollars) in the current budget year so that $1.8 milion amounts to 0.00025 x the total or 0.025%.

http://www.cbp.org/pdfs/2010/100407_Cal ... _Facts.pdf

Surely a human being smarter than a budgerigar can find a problem which is 2% of the total or 100 times as important as this?
Image

Propaganda for the stupid and easily manipulated.

yrs,
rubato

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by rubato »

"Welfare Spending as a Share of Total Spending in California
Has Dropped by More Than Half Since 1996-97"

http://www.cbp.org/pdfs/2010/100407_Cal ... _Facts.pdf

Facts are more important than bullshit intended to whip up hatred and close minds.

yrs,
rubato

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Lord Jim »

you do not want to live in a Section 8 building.
Gim, I don't know how things work where you live, but in California, Section 8 recipients can have their rent and paid, (up to a certain amount...generally fairly close or equal to market value) anywhere they can get accepted to live; free standing houses, apartment complexes etc. (A lot of Landlords will accept Section 8 recipients because the rent is supposedly guaranteed...though the downside is if the recipient screws up in some way and loses their Section 8 eligibility, the Landlord is stuck.)
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Gimcrack
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 12:26 am
Location: Minnesota

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Gimcrack »

Lord Jim wrote:
you do not want to live in a Section 8 building.
Gim, I don't know how things work where you live, but in California, Section 8 recipients can have their rent and paid, (up to a certain amount...generally fairly close or equal to market value) anywhere they can get accepted to live; free standing houses, apartment complexes etc. (A lot of Landlords will accept Section 8 recipients because the rent is supposedly guaranteed...though the downside is if the recipient screws up in some way and loses their Section 8 eligibility, the Landlord is stuck.)
There are some section 8 free standing houses and some duplexes, but the majority of section 8 housing in the metro area of the Twin Cities are indeed apartments.
There are three types of public housing: Truly public housing, where the complex is publically owned. Some apartments are only for seniors and disabled people. Privately owned public housing, where someone / a company owns the building. In both these situations the voucher for the housing stays with the apartment. There is also housing choice vouchers, which follows the renter. A person in this program has to hope the owner will take the voucher. In rural area there are other programs to assist housing, often the voucher system as you don't find many apartment buildings in the sticks.

In looking at the Minneapolis Housing program, they will be accepting their first applications for multibedroom units since JUNE 2007. IOW, people with children feasibly have been on the waiting list for three years. In order to be an approved property, the owners are supposed to meet stringent requirements. They probably do, at first. But it declines.

I took a course called Bridges Out of Poverty that gave me a different view into the lives of some of my clients. I mean, I grew up on the Northside of Minneapolis, I knew many people who tottered on the edge of poverty, but never understood the psychology of the way some people lived. A house is just a shelter. Four walls. Who cares what it looks like. It's the transitory property that is important (the 42" LCD TVs, the trimmed out cars, the clothes). One of my most PITA clients used to live down the street from our church. It was a blighted house - broken windows, no yard, trash everywhere. But damn if he didn't come into our offices wearing $500 worth of clothing, chatting on his iPhone. For many people, their pride is in their home. That is not true for many of those in poverty. A house can be gone tomorrow. You take care of what you can take with you. That mentality leaves a house a hellhole when the tenants leave.
Where am I, and why am I holding a handbasket?

@meric@nwom@n

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by @meric@nwom@n »

There are no special cash benefits for having a disabled child
SSI. I also have a friend with a disabled adopted child and she receives not only SSI but a nice $1800.00 a month adoption assistance check from the state of Nebraska, where she adopted the child. Plus medicaid.

I don't begrudge, they save the state huge amounts of money keeping them out of a facility.

User avatar
Gimcrack
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 12:26 am
Location: Minnesota

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Gimcrack »

SSI is a federal program, has nothing to do with state run welfare. Adoption assistance is also separate from state run welfare assistance. What you will often see (as least I do, daily), is that if there is a disabled child on a welfare case, the child will receive Medical Assistance and Food Benefits, but not cash benefits (since the Feds are ponying up the cash). The cash benefits of the parent are minimally reduced - basically they just do not count the child as part of the household for the cash benefits. Financial assistance is available to anyone fostering a child, paid for by the county. Adoption assistance I see only when the child was a ward of the state, has significant disabilities, and the adoptive parents do not have the means to accomodate their particular needs. The assistance does eventually go away.
Where am I, and why am I holding a handbasket?

@meric@nwom@n

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by @meric@nwom@n »

The assistance does eventually go away.
It hasn't yet, and she just turned 13. She was in foster care briefly. Mom legally adopted her when she was about 2,

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 15357
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: The Audacity Of Hope!

Post by Joe Guy »

Gimcrack wrote:SSI is a federal program, has nothing to do with state run welfare.
SSI is a federal welfare program. In California, if a person qualifies for SSI, that person also qualifies for money from the state (called SSP) which is added to the grant.
Gimcrack wrote:Adoption assistance is also separate from state run welfare assistance. What you will often see (as least I do, daily), is that if there is a disabled child on a welfare case, the child will receive Medical Assistance and Food Benefits, but not cash benefits (since the Feds are ponying up the cash).
In California, 'Adoption Assistance' can be either federally or state funded. "State funded" actually means 60% county money and 40% state funds. Also, a child on SSI always qualifies for Medi-Cal ("Medicaid" in other states) but not food stamps because the grant money is supposed to cover food.
Gimcrack wrote:The cash benefits of the parent are minimally reduced - basically they just do not count the child as part of the household for the cash benefits.
The child is excluded from cash aid from TANF because the child is receiving his own disability/welfare payment. He can be excluded from the food stamp household which allows the family to receive more food stamps.
Gimcrack wrote:Financial assistance is available to anyone fostering a child, paid for by the county.
Not really. The definition of a "foster child" is one that is a dependent of the court. For a person to receive financial assistance for caring for a foster child, (in California) the child would need to be placed by the court into a home. That person would need to be a licensed foster parent or go through an approval process that includes a criminal background check of everyone living in the home and an approval of the home itself. The county doesn't pay the full amount of the monthly payment. They pay from 30% to 60% of a grant, based on certain criteria.
Gimcrack wrote:Adoption assistance I see only when the child was a ward of the state, has significant disabilities, and the adoptive parents do not have the means to accomodate their particular needs. The assistance does eventually go away.
Adoption assistance is not only for disabled children. It is available for former foster children who are adopted. Disabled children can get assistance until age 21. All others are eligible until age 18 or until they graduate from high school if they are expected to do so before age 19.

Post Reply