Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Because Everyone Deserves Pizza

Now we have restaurants advertising for food stamp customers. Well, hot diggity dog! Let's just act like those 47 million little consumers are A-okay...we have a table waiting for you right here, sir....

Hard times are not pleasant for anyone. But the more we attempt to remove any stigma for having to rely on welfare to get along, the easier it will be for people to become comfortable there. This may seem uncaring, but the facts show that removing shame from charity simply increases the numbers of people willing to accept charity...and be content to remain there long past its initial necessity. Especially with public monies, because with welfare there is no one "there", no one to answer to, no one to be grateful to, no one to feel obligated to for any generosity. It is surprisingly easy to begin feeling "entitled" in an environment where there is no sense that you owe anyone for what you are receiving.

Shame can be a healthy thing in a society. It can be instrumental in setting the limits of acceptable behavior. Without shame, people find it difficult to impossible to maintain a willingness to make personal sacrifices and keep fighting to regain their independence.

No amount of blubbering is going to change that fact.


  1. Shame/guilt would be good, very hard to cheat to avoid shame and impossible to do it to avoid guilt. I'm not sure how to reestablish them with all the liberals in every walk of life (bureucracies, media, education, journalism, etc. etc.) pushing the other way.

    The only alternative I can see is privation. If you can sit around all day watching cable TV and getting fat with food stamps you're getting too much "support". If any job you can find will give you a better quality of life than welfare will you've got a serious incentive to find and keep one. Reducing the work requirements for welfare may have appeared compassionate but ultimately it was quite a cruel trick to play on them.

    1. It is a HUGE, long term problem. Part of the allure of leftism is that you can shed any conscience and sense of moral obligation to "go the right thing" when it conflicts with "do your own thing."

      Do your own thing wins, every time. Sex, drugs and rock 'n roll, baby!

      But, yes, the first step is to craft rules for welfare that do not pander to the lowest impulses in someone, but instead, force them to become proactive in building their own lives. Welfare reform under Gingrich's Republican Congress did that -- or went a good long way in that direction. Obama has gutted that idea and returned welfare to "just do it."

      What works as a slogan for Nike isn't the best public policy.

      But we're doomed if businesses start actively courting people because it will rapidly normalize the existence of people living on public assistance, and then no amount of incentive will make many of them change. Why go back to work for 40 hours a week when you can live for free? Once you lose your sense of shame because the world treats you as a valued customer, then all bets are off.

      No matter whose fault it is that someone is on welfare, they should feel a sense of urgency to get off. Once they have no embarrassment, what would make them work hard to essentially lose free stuff? They would be more likely to work under the table and keep their benefits than re-enter the workforce and lose what they have come to expect and feel no shame in getting.

    2. I've been in the workforce for 45 odd years and in that time have probably been out of work a total of 3.5 years.

      I'm proud of that, and any time I spent out of work just motivated me to find some way of earning my own way. I was brought up by my dad to have a very strong work ethic and the idea of letting someone else pick up my tab never sat well with me.

      So, I find it hard to comprehend how can so unashamedly accept and even consider it a right that my taxes should provide a "living" for them.

  2. The worst part of that sign is that it is not even good advertising. It is not also in Spanish.

    I know, I know, Ra-a-a-a-cis-s-s-t. At least I didn't say ebonics...

    Seriously though, you can enter welfare average income in Google and go to a Tanner study with these findings:

    * To match the value of welfare benefits, a mother with two children would have to earn as much as $36,400 in Hawaii or as little as $11,500 in Mississippi.

    * In New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Alaska, and Rhode Island, welfare pays more than a $12.00-an-hour job--or more than two and a half times the minimum wage.

    * In 40 states welfare pays more than an $8.00-an-hour job. In 17 states the welfare package is more generous than a $10.00-an-hour job.

    Why? Why get a job that pays less?

    1. Tuerqas, you're not going to believe this, but I've tried to respond to your comment THREE times and every time, I hit some stupid, random key and the whole thing closes out and all my work disappears! I am just about to throw this stupid computer through a window.

      Anyway, I am trying ONE LAST TIME.

      The worst part of that sign is that it is not even good advertising. It is not also in Spanish.

      We live up in the Sierra foothills and we are as lily-white as you can find in California. Some would say we are hillbillies of the first order. Rednecks for damn sure. So no Spanish.


      And yes, it makes no sense for someone to assume the work and risk and possibly investment in tuition, etc., to try to develop work skills when they can live on public assistance and do that well. Sure, it is never going to be $100,000 a year, but we must realize that people get used low expectations if it is what they believe is normal or they've stopped believing that they could do better.

      Risk is scary and staying where you are isn't.

  3. If you are on food stamps, keep your ass out of the pizza parlor/hamburger joint/ mexican restaurant/chinese restaurant, etc, and learn how to cook.
    For the cost of a bag of cookies, you can purchase the ingredients to make 3 times the cookies that taste so much better. Same with home made breads, pies, cakes, stews, soups, etc.
    Home made cheeseburgers with home made onion rings or french fries are so much better than restaurant bought. Or, chicken breast simmered in broccoli cheese soup, with add'l fresh broccoli chopped in. You can eat so much better for less if you do your own cooking. And, most folks collecting food stamps don't have anything else to do, anyway.
    By the way, people, take 1 lb of ground beef, one quarter cup finely chopped onion, and three tablespoons of red wind, mix well, then cook over charcoal with a mixture of mesquite and hickory chips wrapped in foil for smoke. You won't have a better 'burger anywhere at any price.

    1. red wine, not red wind. duh!!!!
      BTW, a meat loaf baked in a smoker is way better than one just baked in an oven.

    2. YUMMMMMMMM! I'm 100% a grilled burger girl. NEVER make burgers in the house, no matter WHAT the weather. It's outside all year round. Our daughter raises a lamb every year for FFA, and other than the choicest cuts (rack, loin chops, shanks), we have it ground into lamb burger. Nothing better on the planet. I always say someone could start a burger joint with just lamb burgers on the menu and call it "Bo Peeps". SO delicious!

      And yes, cooking at home is not only healthier but cheaper. The only restaurant food we ever go out for is sushi. I'm just not going to deal with trying to get the fresh seafood for that. But everything else, we cook. I love to cook and am always disappointed in meals at restaurants, to be frank.