When I read some of the anectdotes here about encounters with tea-partiers, I sometimes wonder, can they really be that bad? After my Facebook experience yesterday, I have concluded that, yes, they really are that bad.
Yesterday I poked the hornets' nest on my dear and sweet cousin's facebook wall. It all started innocently enough, but then her sister-in-law (or at least I presume she was the sister-in-law), an apparent tea-jihadist, got involved. I don't know why, but every time I engage with one of them, it ends up with with me being reasoned and rational, but respectfully disagreeing, and them yelling and screaming and calling names. The topic dujour: welfare queens. Well, that's what she wanted to talk about anyway.
My cousin expressed the same frustration that all of us have felt at one time or another:
Sick of working and never having any money!!! BUT the people that hardly ever work, or live off the state have money for everything!!! How is that fair?
Hey, we've all been there. You budget and you can only go out for dinner twice a month, but the Jonses, who you swear don't make any more money than you do, seem to go out all the time.
Then one of her friends chimed in:
I wonder that all the time
And then the sister-in-law:
Good question...ive known people who survive SOLELY by milking the government tit as it were
So she says. I don't doubt that there are people who game the system and manage to do okay on government assistance. After all, Reagan called out all the welfare queens, so they must exist, right? Well, I thought I would add something to the conversation.
I think that those people who seem to have more money than they should are usually living beyond their means. It will catch up with them eventually. However, I have yet to see anyone living high on the hog on government assistance. The Ronald Reagan "welfare queens" are largely a myth.
Or at least they used to be a myth until Obama stripped out the work requirement. Of course sister-in-law has different ideas:
NOT TRUE ccyd....Ive known peeps, who, as stated above, survived by way of GOV ASST programs and naught else. They didnt have a job etc. They used foodstamps, cash assistence, the program for baby items, ALL of it.
But isn't that what the social safety net is supposed to do? "Survive by way of GOV ASST?" I responded:
A safety net should allow someone to survive. I took [Cousin]'s comment to mean that they could "live in style" on it. I don't know of a government assistance program that is not means-tested (except Social Security and Medicare, but that's a whole other story). I think my original comment holds-- those who seem like they have too much money are probably borrowing it and not paying it back, which is a recipe for disaster.
Non controversial, right? A guy's got to try to get back to the original comment, but sis-in-law was having none of it. She just KNOWS everyone on welfare is a cheat and able to live high on the hog without working a stitch.
And again, im telling you, these people lived all too happily and well, with ONLY GOV AID...are you trying to say the people I know were getting some other kind of income? If so, thats not true, they literally had ONLY what the GOV provided and still lived well enough to afford everything they wanted AND needed....NOTE: They didnt drive a porsche or etc...THAT would be impossible with JUST Gov asst....actually, now that I think about it, said peoples could prolly figure out a way hahaha....they were beyond resourceful in finding the gov asst. You dont know these people m8, disbelieve all you want, I WITNESSED it.....they lived far better than I, and I had a job...INFACT, they STILL live better than I do RIGHT NOW. And I have a fulltime job, making 9ish an hour. I DONT waste money either. Yet they are happier and better off than I have been, am, or ever will be. THESE PEOPLE KNOW HOW TO ABUSE THE SYSTEM....is it really THAT hard to believe someone could do so? That someone can take from the gov...like the gov usually takes from US?
Well, I thought that this was a good opportunity to do a little educating. A "teachable moment" as it were. So I did a little research and came back with this:
You may well be facing the exception and not the rule. The vast, vast majority of welfare recipients are in poverty. Some of them cannot break out, but 2 out of 3 do. Most welfare recipients receive benefits for less than three years before they are able to get back on their feet. The social safety net is there for a reason. If you were suddenly to lose your job and couldn't find another by the time your unemployment benefits (another wicked government program) ran out, I would hazard a guess that you would be thankful for food stamps and public assistance.
Well, friend chimed in next. Obviously, I don't know what I'm talking about because all welfare recipients live in Harlem, MT.
u need to move to Harlem Montana and work at the bank! Or Albertsons.... Or even the public school here.. we who scrape by month to month on a income we work for while I see people walking in Albertsons buying lobster and steak with a foodie card while I'm buying mac and cheese and some meat that's on sale... I'm sorry welfare is no longer an assistance program but a way of life!
I wanted to say, "Why don't you come down to West Philly and see how it is." But instead, I tried to go the high road and continue my reasonable argument.
Well, I don't know what you are seeing, but the statistics don't lie. Most people on government assistance don't want to be on it and try to get off as soon as they can. You may be experiencing something called the availability heuristic where your attention is drawn to the few bad examples while overlooking the ones who use food stamps as they were intended.
I didn't mean to start a [poop] storm over this. I merely wanted to point out that many people live beyond their means by running up the credit card or taking out home equity loans they can't pay back. On the outside they look like they are living the good life, but in reality they are headed for a date with the Bankruptcy Court.
Not capitulating, but respectful. And non controversial. What did I say that isn't true?
I guess the truth is a little hard for some poeple to accept, because this is what sis-in-law came back with:
Sorry, all i hear from you now is blah blah blah. Quit trying to be so righteous, youre not even understanding us, but OH, i so DO understand you and youre type. Youre being a lil ignorant here, so please pull your head out your ass. Every person ive known thats on assistence, wishes they could stay on it...FUCK YOUR STATISTICS! Tell me what ever facts you want, Ill still think youre a douche. Have a good day, I shant reply further, so dont post and expect me to....youll be preaching to no one,
Me "righteous?" Who is the one saying she is better than those welfare cheats? She and the Romney campaign have a lot in common. They believe in myths, repeat scurrilous rumors and have a complicated relationship with the truth. There are lots of things I wanted to say back, like "you and your stupid family are sucking at the government tit with all your farm subsidies," or "please don't have any children -- the gene pool can't handle it." But remember all this is happening on my dear, sweet cousin's Facebook wall. So this is what I said:
[Cousin], sorry this got out of hand. You deserve better than having this stuff posted on your wall. I'll keep my comments to family in the future.