Welfare gamers

Aug 2019
305
32
USA
If I said "most high income business executives game the tax code, to avoid paying IRS and other taxes.", how many Liberals do we suppose would object, and cry "Foul!"?

How many would demand a source document? How many would insist they pay taxes every time they buy something, so no worries?

How many Liberals would object to such a claim, and request documentation? If you say some number greater than zero, I will say "Foul", and request documentation.

If I turn that around, and say "Most recipients of federal cash welfare game the welfare system", what do we suppose the typical Liberal reaction would be? SSI Facts

Yeah, mass disbelief, and adamant insistence for documentation.

The term "gaming the system", is in fairly common usage. If you look around the internet you can find definitions and explanations, with little controversy or disagreement.

When I say "welfare gamer", here is what I mean. Someone who shapes their reported circumstances, to maximum welfare benefits. Others are free to disagree.

A good welfare gamer will never do something that could create a paper trail showing fraud (just like the IRS gamer). That would be self-defeating, as discovered fraud could lead to a temporary interruption of welfare benefits (or prison for the IRS gamer).

Some fraud is a case of "he said, she said", and could never be documented, so discovery of such alleged fraud would be inconsequential, would result in no interruptions or reduction of benefits. No potential harm to the gamer, and more welfare benefits, is an open door.

There is a huge difference between tax gamers, and welfare gamers. Liberals like to pretend they are essentially the same. Do not be fooled.

Tax payers are offered ways to reduce their taxable income, and increase their spendable income, for the improvement of the capitalist economy, as well as their own financial situation. None of them are expected to find ways to pay more taxes. Those receiving welfare are expected to find ways to reduce the need for welfare, not increase the need.

The welfare system is promoted as a way to lift low income households out of poverty. It is meant to improve the financial situation of a household, so they are less welfare dependent.
Welfare gamers strive against the intentions of the welfare system. They undermine it. There intentions are to increase benefits today, and extend the length of time they qualify for welfare.

The vast majority of money spent on welfare goes to a hard core population, that are the same households, and same individuals, month after month, year after year, decade after decade. The numbers demonstrate that it is not mathematically possible that welfare is spent on temporary assistance to a great number of individuals. No evidence shows otherwise. Of all the individuals who receive welfare for a month, or year, or decade, the majority are long term recipients, and welfare dependent most of their lives. Cradle to grave welfare recipients is not at all uncommon, and the goal of any good welfare gamer.

Of all the 40 million food stamp recipients, most of them are welfare gamers, shaping the reported events in their life to maximize welfare benefits. This is demonstrated by the high number of cradle to grave welfare recipients, the encouragement of this by Liberals.
Liberals object to any work component for food stamps or Medicaid. There is a work component to receiving Unemployment Compensation. You must respond to any job referrals, and/or, apply for a certain number of jobs. That is their work component, and Liberals object to this requirement, for any welfare recipient.
Liberals object to requiring any work history requirement for healthy adults with no dependents, who want Medicaid.
If a proposed welfare requirement has the words work, or employment, in it, they object.

If it is easy to believe high income executives game the tax code, it is just as easy to believe food stamp and federal cash welfare recipients game the welfare codes, in about the same percentages.
 
Feb 2014
3,021
1,339
Oregon
I don't believe we would have welfare without legitimate reasons for needing it. If we needed the people on welfare they would be fulfilling that need. The truth is, we don't them. And perhaps we have a bigger problem with jobs that are unethical because the business is unethical? I think if we eliminated all the unethical jobs, the unemployment rate would be excessively high. So if we are wanting a moral society, perhaps we should look at the bigger picture?

As for all those attacks on liberals, they are unsubstantiated and serve no purpose other than attacking liberals. I am not sure I should any of us should even reply to such trash?
 
Jul 2014
15,288
9,393
massachusetts
Of course, the op assumes that people on welfare be have a battery of expensive lawyers to help them game the system, in addition to an army of lobbyists, to shape the system to be gameable
 
  • Like
Reactions: se7en
Aug 2019
305
32
USA
Of course, the op assumes that people on welfare be have a battery of expensive lawyers to help them game the system, in addition to an army of lobbyists, to shape the system to be gameable
Wow. So many logical errors. Where to start.

I will focus on the two, hugely glaring, denials of reality.

If a system has rules, it is gameable.

The ones best able to game a system are the lifelong, steadfast, fully committed, participants. Not some cadre of outsiders.
 
Jul 2014
15,288
9,393
massachusetts
Wow. So many logical errors. Where to start.

I will focus on the two, hugely glaring, denials of reality.

If a system has rules, it is gameable.

The ones best able to game a system are the lifelong, steadfast, fully committed, participants. Not some cadre of outsiders.
You get that at your Klan meetings?
 
  • Like
Reactions: se7en and Clara007
Dec 2015
17,982
17,094
Arizona
Did you sign up? Because it's clear you never attended.
Yeah...NO.
BeThere did not attend. He/She is one more of the ever-thriving populace of Ronnie Rayguns 'The Welfare Queen Club': fixated on "scroungers" or in this case "gamers".
It's basically an addiction. The overwhelming FEAR that SOMEONE--SOMEWHERE--will take away his/her cookie. It's the same club that loves America but hates Americans. The GETADAMNJOB association.
No matter how many times this has been explained to "The Club" the facts JUST won't stick. Maybe there should be a Sociology 101 class on this. OH THAT'S right. THERE is!

Oh the dependency! The shame! The scam! The disgrace! of all those single mothers and their children sustained by MY COOKIE. The audacity of these genius "gamers" who manipulate the TRUE victims! The haves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: se7en
Jul 2019
4,989
2,544
Georgia
Wow. So many logical errors. Where to start.

I will focus on the two, hugely glaring, denials of reality.

If a system has rules, it is gameable.

The ones best able to game a system are the lifelong, steadfast, fully committed, participants. Not some cadre of outsiders.
sounds like work.