Publication of list of welfare recipients?

Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 7 months ago to Government
42 comments | Share | Flag

For the record, I am not in favor of this because of privacy issues, but I do think that the shame associated with being on welfare is gone. Without a reinstitution of shame for being on welfare, however, there is no hope of removing welfare, as has been discussed ad nauseum as a precondition for solving the immigration issue.

Is there a way to shame moochers that is acceptable to Objectivism? I think there is, but I would like to hear what others say about it.
SOURCE URL: http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/09/27/maine-mayor-wants-publish-names-and-addresses-welfare-recipients-online


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 7 months ago
    When we had Proposition 8 here in California (maintain marriage as man and women) those who contributed money to keep marriage as was had their names and addresses published by the Sacramento newspaper. Frankly, I was disgusted by that. What if there's a nutjob out there wanting to take drastic measures, and what if these families have little children? No...for me it's too much.

    Realize what we're doing here with this kind of thing. The government system provides an environment for an R-gene population to flourish - with welfare, food stamps, government schools, etc. Then, we attack the livestock. No. I'd rather just go Galt at this point.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 9 years, 7 months ago
      This is why I was not in favor of publishing such a list. Vigilanteism could run amok.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 7 months ago
        ...by nutjobs.

        I have known families on assistance. Many of us have. Anymore, I just chalk this all up on an environment that we've fostered for 70 years or so. Many of these families - the father (if he's stuck around) is a rock head. The wife is too busy trying to raise the kids to acquire the skills for the job market. Etc... I'll admit, I almost sound liberal - LOL.

        I can't help but believe that we, as a society, really had a responsibility to push our population towards intelligence, education, clarity of thought. But, we did the opposite. This is the result, this welfare state - and one reason why I love the movie Idiocracy. And frankly, it breaks my heart to see kids born into it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by SaltyDog 9 years, 7 months ago
    I see merit in this idea. I'm not sure about the addresses, but the names should be public record, and I don't see it as "name and shame". Rather, if I see someone for example using welfare for food staples, fine...that's what it's for. But if that individual now takes out cash to buy beer, cigarettes, Lotto tickets, TV dinners, etc., as a taxpayer I should have some recourse. In my experience, the given example is more the rule than the exception.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by robgambrill 9 years, 7 months ago
    As SaltyDog mentioned they already kind of stick out for holding up the line at the grocery.

    Families on assistance use WIC vouchers for formula, EBT card for groceries, and cash for beer and magazines. So they get rung up 3 times.

    Also, and this may be why they 'need' help, some who are really bad at math get a cart full of groceries and either go over the limit and have to take stuff off, or they hand stuff over one item at a time until they hit the amount on the EBT card, and the rest of the stuff has to be cleared away.

    I have always wondered why they don't have a special line for people who need to use assistance, not so much as for shaming people but just to speed up the lines.

    I suppose Grocery Stores think that would be bad for business or they would get sued or something.

    I think a separate line would be good for business as they could devote clerks to the extra processing it takes, and for better or worse, every one would know who is paying with food stamps. That might be an incentive for people to be more independent.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 9 years, 7 months ago
      At my WalMart a few weeks ago, the person with the EBT card in front of me got less hassle than I did over a valid credit card.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 7 months ago
        But you don't have a bankster to print fiat (cash, vouchers, etc) for you. All you have is honor, ethics, integrity, reputation, credit rating over 800, debt-free property assets.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 7 months ago
          Yeah. And, that all looks pretty suspicious. Haha....

          I remember when I walked into my bank with a big check from the sale of a house. They, literally, didn't know how to process it.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 7 months ago
    For the record, I am in favor of publication, not only of the names of welfare recipients, but also (to the extent possible) exactly what each of them spends the money on. Publishing online statements for their government-issued debit cards would not be difficult technologically, and it would likely cut down on purchases of liquor, cigarettes and lottery tickets by welfare recipients. Taxpayers deserve a full accounting of how government funds are spent, and this includes spending on welfare.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 7 months ago
      System is easy to beat. You use it to buy your neighbors grocery list and he or she pays half price in cash. The neighbor figures the savings are a refund on excessive taxes. The moocher buys cigarettes or......whatever...... especially easy in a state that uses welfare debit cards.

      Same amount of money spent by the idiots running the welfare system but this time the neighbor who often has a real job and struggling to stay off welfare get's that little boost that makes going to work worth while.

      It's purely a case of Robin Hooding the system. Taking from those who stole and returning it to those who earned.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 7 months ago
        Beating the system this way would still involve an extra step and would leave the welfare recipient with less money than if he were able to purchase cigarettes or whatever with the debit card. It could also be made illegal (if it is not already) to do what you suggested above or to convert money in the debit card to cash. This wouldn't eliminate fraud but it would make it less prevalent by raising the risk of performing such an action, especially if it is publicly known that the person doing it is on welfare..
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 7 months ago
          I never noticed any risk. When I lived in Oregon it was quite common and very open. So were the Deadheads when coming into the state for a concert. First stop food stamps. $500 worth on the initial issue back then no ID required. Second stop conversion to cash. Most had regular clientele. Where's the risk?

          A few came up with a story about needing to buy some special kind of organic soap the stamps didn't cover....Most didn't bother except for some dickering. The closer to concert time the lower the percentage.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 7 months ago
            Different circumstances, back then there was no Internet so even public information was much less public. The risk lies in the opportunity for heightened scrutiny of a welfare recipient's transactions and more stringent enforcement of the laws regulating such transactions.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 7 months ago
              Polly Anna lives!
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 7 months ago
                Demonstrate how this system is any better. Let's see Johnny Moocher sees his mom is going shopping with her brand new socialist card. Asks for a few odds and ends. "Sure Johnny we have lots to spend. The list is published. So what. Johnny took half of it and sold it to Jack Looter at half price for cash. Some items fo 1/3rd. Jacks dinner table is not a subject of public knowledge. Be it card punch, Lead 100 v. 2 or smoke signals are you going to check every one's garbage cans or raid their dinner tables to make really really sure????

                The rest is a pipe dream or a badly stated diversion of spiderless cobwebs. These tenth generation welfare kids are raised and cut their teeth on outwitting the system while the system turned around and bent over for them. In fact I'll go so far as to say the system wil do their best to protect the moochers.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 7 months ago
      I'm curious. What would you personally do with that information? I don't know what I'd do with it...probably nothing.

      I know many people think we can put a halt to this kind of abuse of the producers. I don't. I think it's too late.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 7 months ago
        Maybe we couldn't put a halt to this kind of abuse, but we could slow it down. People are less likely to "game the system" in the light of day than in the darkness.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 7 months ago
          Maybe fish need bicycles.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ CBJ 9 years, 7 months ago
            If doing nothing about the situation is the preferred alternative, then why are we even discussing it?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 7 months ago
              Who here said the preferred alternative is to do nothing? The question was one of publishing info on people who take the help. I better re-read this...

              My point is that publishing the people's info isn't a solution and could lead to real problems for innocent kids. The real solution is to make people less dependent on the gubment. Good luck with that...huh?

              That's why I think the nation is doomed. We will never choose to fix things. We don't have the will, we don't have the spine.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 7 months ago
        Oregon's excuse for switching for a welfare credit card or debit card called "Oregon Trails" was so the moochers wouldn't be embarrassed paying with food stamps. Turned out they were embareassed by acting as if the card made them equal to the original settlers who made the year long trip. The main reason was cut down on the cost of printing and distributing and accounting for he stamps. But some idiot in State Government went one step to far and slipped on the soap.job.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by abunch 9 years, 7 months ago
    Shame works, but the chronic abusers aren't going to care as long as their benefits aren't interrupted. It'll be the people that really need the support that will feel this one the most. Put limits and a cooling off period on the benefits just like with unemployment. You could also pull one from the insurance playbook and put a lifetime limit on welfare.

    Those of you advocating for a shades of grey "monitor what they spend your tax dollars on" are missing the point. The point is that they're spending your tax dollars.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 7 months ago
    I disagree with calculated manipulative shaming, but I'm for openness in gov't. It would be reasonable to make records of gov't funding searchable by business entity and individuals. Then as soon as you get a grant or gov't money , vendors start calling the next day about how you will spend it. If you don't like that, you don't have to get gov't grants/prgorams.

    I don't think this would actually cause people not to apply for grants, gov't contracts, and Welfare benefits though. Most people getting them either think they're a good thing or believe in taking any gov't benefit their legally entitled to. I'm a proponent of drastically reducing gov't spending, but if there's a program I'm eligible for that's worthwhile to pursue, I do it without compunction.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 7 months ago
    Hello jbrenner,
    Along the same line; Whatever happened to having to stand in the unemployment office line to pick up your check? The statists want serfs to be reliant on the state and in order to maintain numbers they must remove all stigma and inconvenience.
    I am for removing the welfare benefits altogether, but it seems unlikely. As far as voting goes, if it is too risky to publish names publicly, then the least that could be done is to forward the list to the polling district so voting more money from the public coffers could be inhibited. This too will be unlikely as it has been previously argued to be unjust. But, what is just about voting yourself other peoples' money?

    Benjamin Franklin — 'When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic.'
    Regards,
    O.A.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 9 years, 7 months ago
      OA, we don't even care to stop illegal aliens, cartoon characters and the dead from voting..I doubt any effort will ever be made to stop welfare recipients.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 7 months ago
        Indeed AJ, indeed... I believe that perceived reality is why so many rest their hopes on border control... This too seems unlikely and does not get at the root of the problem. Going Galt or sucking it up? What to do?

        I suggest that if people want no national IDs (and rightly so) and open border crossings then why can't we use some of that new technology for facial recognition at the crossings to weed out the criminals? If nations would keep and only share their "criminal database' then we could let all others pass and only pull out of line those that the system recognized as criminal. This would seem to me to reduce the concern of the innocent wishing free travel who then would not be put through any undue questioning or excessive ID requirements. Innocent until proven guilty would prevail. I would still wish to limit citizenship to children born to at least one natural born citizen until legal application and citizenship tests were followed and approved. Voting must be restricted to citizens. Also any vestiges of welfare or taxpayer subsidies should be, if not eliminated for all, at least be restricted to citizens.

        My two cents after reading a lot of discussion on the matter around here of late...
        Regards,
        O.A.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by gcarl615 9 years, 7 months ago
    I think this is treating the symptom and not the sickness cause. Simply end the system and allow those who believe in charity, like churches. collect either the funds or actual food and distribute it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 9 years, 7 months ago
      I won't disagree with your analysis. A friend compared the welfare situation to you buying your own drink vs. your uncle paying for an open bar at a wedding. If you are paying yourself, you actually consider the cost. If Uncle Sam pays for the bill, the moocher will ask for Top Shelf because he has no shame. Reintroducing shame into the equation might change this for some moochers.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo