babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » feminism   » Women and the Welfare "Web"

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Women and the Welfare "Web"
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 28 April 2002 06:08 PM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Next week, on May 1, D'Amour will appear in court again to appeal her sentence. This time, she
will be represented by Toronto lawyer Clayton Ruby. "To want a better life for your own daughter is the kind of emotion and motive that we should be fostering," he says. "The problem for people on welfare is that they have all hope beaten out of them and they accept further welfare and further degradation for their own children. She's committed a crime for someone else's benefit, not her own. I tell you, I defend criminals all the time and this does not happen.
There's a certain selfishness that is absent in this case."

Click!

(Sorry I can't get the link to work. It will take you to the National Post, and then you must go into Arts and Life and click on the link titled "Dancing out of the Welfare Trap." Does anyone know how to remedy this?)

[ April 28, 2002: Message edited by: Relyc ]

Try this one!

[ April 28, 2002: Message edited by: Relyc ]


From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
rosebuds
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2399

posted 28 April 2002 06:53 PM      Profile for rosebuds     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I can't bring myself to have sympathy for this woman or for her daughter.

To a certain degree, I can appreciate her welfare experience. As a single mom I had to collect benefits for a short period of time (six months). It's difficult to live like that, and it's hard to make ends meet. I can appreciate now that a certain amount of "fraud" is understandable, because it's really the only way to survive.

But, sending your daughter to ballet school in Europe? I'm sorry, but the idea that that kind of schooling is an entitlement doesn't work for me. It may not be "fair", but I must admit that type of experience (living in Europe to study dance) is not what I want my tax dollars paying for.

There are other ways to get the money for a good education - artistic or otherwise. Scholarships, bursaries, hard work - they all add up to A WAY.

While I empathize with the plight of the poor, I can't see this as a real example. The author's stories of his upbringing are more like it. Someone hiding the small income to maintain benefits - that makes sense. Someone working full time and collecting benefits to send their kid to a European school? No way.

And if Mr. Ruby thinks that there was no "element of selfishness" in this crime, he doesn't understand parenthood or human nature.

This woman does not speak for the poor or the working poor or the single mothers of this nation. Most of us don't think that the country owes us a free ride. Most of us work hard for what we have. Most of us wouldn't dream of living so far beyond our means that we need the tax payers to double our income to maintain our lifestyle.


From: Meanwhile, on the other side of the world... | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
agent007
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1189

posted 28 April 2002 08:02 PM      Profile for agent007     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
rosebuds farts:
quote:
I can't bring myself to have sympathy for this woman or for her daughter.

I smell a rodent ... could rosebuds be rabid gerbil?!

Audra, please check.


From: Niagara Falls ON | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 28 April 2002 08:57 PM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, I know r'buds from her other posts, and she aint no rabid gerbin, thank god. Also I understand her point. However I think the broader point of the article is what's significant here--the fact that poverty is so self-perpetuating. I've been on welfare too, and the whole system seems set up to keep the poor poor. And what does a single mother do with a kid who is bursting with potential and creativity and has exactly zero financial resources at her disposal? rosebuds, what would you do if you were still living from one welfare check to the next and your brilliant, creative kid was about to graduate from high school and demanding a future with an education in it? Student loans are no longer what they used to be, and while he or she could "work for a few years" what kind of work could an uneducated 18 year old get? And exactly how many years of that kind of low-paying, soul-destroying work would he/she have to endure before s/he had enough to pay for university? How much you want to bet this brilliant, creative young person wouldn't have all the brilliance and creativity beaten out of him or her after five or so years of swiping Optimum cards at Shopper's Drug Mart?

I think it's easy to forget how that kind of poverty boxes you in, and whittles down your options and expectations to practically nothing. If I was a parent facing the prospect of seeing my child live through the same kind of crap, I'd be taking desperate measures too.

[ April 28, 2002: Message edited by: Relyc ]


From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 28 April 2002 09:18 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes Audra, please ensure that new babblers voicing personal opinions are made to feel unwelcome here.
From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 28 April 2002 09:59 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have a friend who collected welfare for a while. When he told his worker that his rent was $500 a month and she might as well send the whole cheque to his landlord she said he was ineligable and would have to move to recieve benefits. "How are you going to live?" she asked.

I've heard a lot of dumb questions in my life but that one really beats them all.

There is no way to live off of what social services is paying people right now. Even if you were the thriftiest person in Canada. Speaking of old Gord, I wonder if Campbell could do it? He sure can trim the fat, huh?

I attended a presentation required before you could recieve benefits in BC several years back. The retired teacher cheerfully explained that while welfare would only pay us $500 per month a minimum wage job would pay $1100!!! Having begged the money for the train to get to this ridiculous presentation I asked if welfare would pay my way to work, my income tax (bringing that whopping $1100 down to about $800), my clothing expenses and my food bills (cause if you are going to work instead of stay home you have to get there, look presentable, and have the energy to get through the day.) Hoorah for minimum wage. Hoorah for a social services system that really helps you get out there and get on with your life.

What I'm saying Relyc, is that I see your point.


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 28 April 2002 10:00 PM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For whatever purpose somebody needs the extra money, i consider welfare fraud about the smallest crime there is.

Especially when we - and also the people on welfare - keep hearing about the ginormous frauds perpetrated by corporate executives and heads of government, who then walk off with a few million in compensation.


From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 28 April 2002 10:25 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Student loans are no longer what they used to be, and while he or she could "work for a few years" what kind of work could an uneducated 18 year old get?

Not true. Student loans are adequate for a university education. I know because I am living entirely on student loans. I lucked into a Christmas job that seems to be one I can go to every year, but it's not absolutely necessary that I work it, and it only brings in around $300 - just a bit of money to buy Christmas presents for the little one. Anyone whose mother is on welfare will qualify for student loans, at least in Ontario.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 28 April 2002 10:39 PM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Student loans are adequate for a university education.

Not for everyone, especially if they don't live at home or get any financial support from their families. And even more so if they're totally honest on their application forms.

It's not uncommon for people to drop out because they can't afford it any more, or else they're working so much their grades go down the toilet. Many young people aren't even considering post-secondary education these days because of the financial constraints.


From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 28 April 2002 10:41 PM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Replying to Michelle:
Really? I admit it's been a long time since I was in the student loan loop (again, thank god). Even so--as I recall, my own student loan at that age (18) was entirely contingent on the fact that my parent's income was low enough to make me qualified for the loan, but just high enough to make me an acceptable risk. This was in the maritimes. But it seems to me it was a federal student loan. . .

. . .Okay the memory is too foggy to continue in this vein. I'll regroup and do some research before opening the old pie-hole again. But allow me to express my surprise that welfare kids can get student loans in Ontario. What a wonderfully progressive province!

[ April 28, 2002: Message edited by: Relyc ]


From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 28 April 2002 11:05 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Not for everyone, especially if they don't live at home or get any financial support from their families.

But we weren't talking about kids who have parents with good incomes who refuse to financially support their education. We're talking about a kid whose mother is on welfare. She would definitely qualify.

Even if she wasn't living at home with her mother, she would still qualify for OSAP, whether she had just left home, or whether she had lived on her own for several years. Either way, whether they only consider the girl to be independent or if they consider her to be her mother's dependent, she will still get OSAP.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 28 April 2002 11:36 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Especially when we - and also the people on welfare - keep hearing about the ginormous frauds perpetrated by corporate executives and heads of government, who then walk off with a few million in compensation.

And the gratuitous abuse of the tax system by "self-employed" individuals who pig out at the trough of tax deductions for living expenses the rest of us have to pay for out of after-tax dollars, and then who sanctimoniously turn around and wag their fingers in our faces for being willing to bite the hand of capitalism.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 28 April 2002 11:39 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I wonder if a child reared on welfare would necessarily have the budgeting skills to manage a student loan as well as you do, Michelle. Poverty can really alter that learning curve, in my experience. Too many other aspects can be involved, including substance abuse, poor health, and a lack of guidance. My guess is if we saw some of the welfare homes of which we speak we'd be amazed the children survived high-school. (I know this is a generalization, I'm not suggesting all welfare parents are drunks or addicts. Just that more of them are than in other income brackets.)

Then again, if their parents were thrifty maybe they pass it on.


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 28 April 2002 11:39 PM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
...she will still get OSAP.

Yeah, but how much? Lots of people get student loans and work, but still can't make ends meet. Note the emerging use of food banks on university campuses.

And loans aren't the whole answer. A lifetime of debt is a disincentive to go to college or university.


From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 28 April 2002 11:55 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Actually, I'm not any better at money management than anyone else. I splurge on occasion. I don't buy the cheapest thing in the grocery store. But that's not the point. The point is, that there are student loans available, and they are enough to live on. Many universities also have bursaries and loans they give out on top of OSAP. I mean, there's only so much you can do - we can come up with reasons all day why someone might have this problem or that one while they're on OSAP. Yes, they may not have money management skills, but then lots of people don't.

Arch mentioned that there are lots of people who get student loans and work, and still can't make ends meet. Well, what can I say about that? We don't know their individual situations. Could be that they are kids with parents whose incomes are high enough that they couldn't get much of a student loan. I agree, that's not right, people should be assessed on their own merits, not on those of their parents since many parents won't pay for university educations. Could be that the student has poor budgeting skills. Could be that the student has spent lots of money partying (and don't tell me that doesn't happen because I see and hear the kids at school talking every day about it). Or it could be that they have run into problems they didn't expect, like a roommate bailing out on them without paying rent, or not being able to find a place that is cheap enough, or whatever. I know there are always situations that come up that are not the ideal.

But the question was, is it possible for a child of a mother on welfare to get enough OSAP to live on. The answer is, it is possible. Sure, that kid is going to have to get roommates, and they aren't going to be living high on the hog, but it's possible. About 7 years ago, I was single and, for OSAP purposes, living with two roommates (one was a boyfriend, but we weren't living together long enough for him to "count" as a spouse). I was working full time up until school started. I still got enough OSAP to live comfortably, pay my share of the rent, and pay for food and stuff. I wasn't a single mother at the time, I was just a single person.

I have a hard time believing that a person living in poverty can't qualify for OSAP, and can't live on the amount they get, especially considering bursaries and special grants that are now available. If the mother of that daughter was resourceful enough to work full time, keep welfare from finding out about her income for a long time, and finding a European art school for her daughter to attend, then she was probably resourceful enough to be able to find out about the OSAP, Canada Student Loans, special bursaries and grants from the government, and bursaries from universities that are available. Please remember that I am making my remarks with regards to this case in particular. We can all come up with hard luck stories we have heard, about starving students and all that. I'm saying that in this case, I doubt it a lot, since I've been there myself and I KNOW what kind of OSAP you get both as a single person and as a single mother.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
rosebuds
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2399

posted 29 April 2002 12:09 AM      Profile for rosebuds     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What is a rabid gerbil anyway? If I knew, I might be offended. Thankfully, I don't know so I guess I don't care...

But GEEZ - what a way to greet someone's thoughts on the matter at hand...

Anyway - I thank everyone for turning the discussion to the inadequacies of the welfare and student loan systems. I certainly agree that welfare fraud is among the most understandable of "crimes" given the system and the ridiculousness of it. When I applied for social services, they asked me why my parents didn't send me money or why I couldn't borrow it...

I think my point is that sending a child to school in Europe is not exactly "making ends meet"... It's a nice but UNNECESSARY extravagance. And in fact I do have a wonderfully creative daughter who I hope will grow up to have every opportunity that I can provide.

I believe that education is a RIGHT rather than a privilege. But come on... I grew up in a relatively wealthy family and going to Europe for school was simply never an option.

We all have our limitations. Some of them are reasonable, and others are not. Some of them I believe in fighting about, some I don't. The "right" to send your child to school in Europe really ain't within the bounds of reasonable as far as I'm concerned.

Of course, the point is the "web" of poverty. I just don't think this woman and her daughter make extremely sympathetic or representative symbols. IN fact, I think using them as any kind of symbol at all does those who are struggling for the basics a disservice.


From: Meanwhile, on the other side of the world... | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 29 April 2002 12:19 AM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
...I've been there myself...

So have I. I got two degrees without getting into too much debt, and I understand that I was fortunate in many ways, and that what works for me doesn't work for everyone.

We've all heard old-timers give their "pull yourself up from your bootstraps -- I made it so you can too" lectures at one time or another. This seems to be along the same lines.

I'd be curious if anyone can provide links to reputable stats on post-secondary education in Canada (i.e. tuition levels, loan amounts, cost of living, debtloads etc). That would be a bit more relevent than personal anecdotes.


From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 29 April 2002 12:31 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, it's NOT a bootstrap argument that I'm using. If I wanted to use a bootstrap argument, I would tell people that I starved and worked night and day to get through university. What I'm saying is that I am getting government loans. I mentioned that I think those loans should be expanded so that people who don't fit into a certain "category" or fall through the cracks will get as good an opportunity as I got.

I'm sorry if you don't think personal anecdotes are "relevant", Andy, but this whole thread was started about one individual, anecdotal case. I was only commenting on that case using my own expeience of the student loan system, not talking about everyone who has ever used the system.

And another thing - why is it that when people who are more right-oriented on this board start playing the statistics and links game - you know, demanding that we back up every statement with 12 links to credible statistical sources - the people on the left get very bothered by that, saying that not allowing people to talk from experience or without entire bibliographies is discouraging discussion, but then whenever someone makes a statement that is unpopular, suddenly the more left-wing posters want you to back it up with grand macro-social statistics?

Crap on that. I never claimed to be speaking for every person who ever tried to get a student loan. I was merely saying that I find it hard to believe that this girl IN THIS PARTICULAR ANECDOTAL CASE - you know, the case that this thread is supposedly about - could not get a student loan that was sufficient to see her through a university program. That's all. And I based my doubt on the fact that, having navigated the student loan system myself and finding out all the ins and outs of it, having been a very impoverished person myself the first time I was no it, my experience is that people in my situation and hers qualify for a student loan that will cover her education expenses if she lives frugally. That's all.

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 29 April 2002 12:36 AM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
Oops. Read next post.

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Andy Social ]


From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 29 April 2002 12:48 AM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
why is it that when people who are more right-oriented on this board start playing the statistics and links game - you know, demanding that we back up every statement with 12 links to credible statistical sources

I'm not saying that, but if you want you want to claim that the OSAP system is adequate because it worked for you, I can offer stories about people I know who either got pittance from OSAP because of increased restrictions, dropped out because they couldn't afford school, worked lengthy hours to pay the bills and got crappy marks, graduated with enormous debts, had to go to food banks or dumpsters for food, became homeless, or didn't even consider university/college because of the cost. This kind of stuff is increasing, not decreasing in Ontario.

Having read and written for campus papers, I know the stats are out there that show it's becoming harder and harder for young people to pay for post-secondary education. I'm just too lazy to go look for the data right now.


From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 29 April 2002 12:54 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You are both right but from different perspectives so maybe you should both consider burying the hatchet.

How are you both right? Well, let's say two syudents receive, for a year, $10,000. Student 'A' lives in London, Ontario, attending UWO, and student 'B' lives in Toronto, attending UofT.

Without working and while living quite modestly, student 'A' with rent at approx. $400 per month for a one bedroom, can likely make ends meet.

But student 'B' with rent at approx. $800 for a bachelor's apartment, will probably encounter difficulties.

It seems when we debate these things, sometimes, we forget the same details could tell vastly different stories in different places.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 29 April 2002 08:56 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But what you're forgetting is that the student at the U of T likely has access to lots of bursaries from the university, that are given out on the basis of financial need to top up their income. I'm talking, in the thousands of dollars per year. Of course, I'm not positive about that, but if a smaller university like Queen's has lots of bursary money to give to their students who are suffering financial hardship (and they do), then I would be surprised to hear that the U of T doesn't.

And Andy, if you do have examples of people you know whose parents are on welfare who DIDN'T get OSAP, by all means, share. I would be interested to hear of cases where extremely poor kids do not qualify for OSAP.

Edited to say - ARGH! I said "Arch" instead of "Andy" originally.

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 29 April 2002 09:38 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There are bursaries but you might be surprised to discover how limited they are.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 29 April 2002 11:16 AM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Of course, all discussion of university, part-time jobs, loans and bursaries are irrelevant to the case in point. At age 18, you're too old to study ballet.
From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 29 April 2002 12:16 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
She can't afford to travel to Europe very often? Gee that is sad. I mean what kind of welfare system is it that won't pony up the cash for a nice holiday to Spain or Germany each year?

I blame the Tories! If they even cared one bit about the most vulnerable people in society they would put together a nice little junket to Greese, Italy, and France each spring so that people wouldn't feel so down about themselves.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 29 April 2002 12:53 PM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Okay, so the arts aren't important. Dancers are a luxury, a superfluous decorative frill on the outside edge of culture.
While training engineers to build bombs is essential to any society.

From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 983

posted 29 April 2002 12:58 PM      Profile for dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm glad you've finally figured that out, nonesuch!
From: pleasant, unemotional conversation aids digestion | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 29 April 2002 01:34 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well sure arts are important. Why can't Germany pay for their ballet performers? Why isn't Germany paying for some of the Canadian artists living on the streets of Toronto? Hell my wife is an artist but also works in law 40 some hours a week. Can we have an extra $1000 a month too please?
From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 29 April 2002 01:43 PM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
at age eighteen you're too old to study ballet.

Did it say how old the daughter is in the article? Maybe that's why the mom couldn't avail herself of the usual funding bodies.


From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rapunzel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2488

posted 29 April 2002 01:49 PM      Profile for Rapunzel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
She broke the law, lied and betrayed society's confidence.

Society does not have to judge whether her cause was justifiable or not. That's not the issue. She sent her daughter to dance school with the money she stole from society. Others might send their dog to obedience school or their mother to a spa for the weekend.

If you make money on the side, you have to alert the authorities. that's the rule. It is a reasonable rule and cannot be subjectively interpreted to suit each situation.

She is guilty and should have to pay it all back.

In fact, now that her daughter is a working dancer, with an education purchased with money stolen from the mouths of the really needy, maybe she could offer to pay back the money on behalf of her mother in monthly payments. It would be the least she could do. I'm not holding my breath though.

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]


From: T.O. | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 29 April 2002 01:52 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah it says her daughter was born in 75 so that would make her 26 or 27 years old.
From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 29 April 2002 01:56 PM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In fact, now that her daughter is a working dancer, thanks to the generiosity of Canadian taxpayers, mayby she could offer to pay back the money on behalf of her mother in monthly payments.

I'm not opposed to that. If she's making decent money now, she can afford to put some revenue back in the pot to help other underprivileged young people get a leg up.

My earlier comments were related to student loans in general; not this particular case.

I also believe that corporations and rich people who cheat on their taxes, break environmental laws or screw their shareholders, customers and/or workers should pay back all their ill-gotten gains. I won't hold my breath.


From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 29 April 2002 02:11 PM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I think my point is that sending a child to school in Europe is not exactly "making ends meet"... It's a nice but UNNECESSARY extravagance. And in fact I do have a wonderfully creative daughter who I hope will grow up to have every opportunity that I can provide.
$800 a month ... that sounds like living expenses for a single young student anywhere in Canada. Just because the location happens to be Europe, doesn't mean it's a luxury item.

I don't support what this woman has done, but for a different reason. She is an able-bodied, intelligent woman. She chose to limit her paid work to what was 'meaningful' to her, and was on welfare to avoid the kind of boring and meaningless full time work that would have properly supported her and her daughter's dance endeavours.

Like most people, my job's not very sexy (sounds better than it is), but it pays the bills and I can support my two children on my salary. There's even a bit left over for the odd luxury. I've been a wretchedly poor single mother on welfare, and I'd scrub toilets for 40 hours a week before I'd submit to that kind of humiliating poverty ever again.


From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Omnigal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2282

posted 29 April 2002 02:12 PM      Profile for Omnigal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Having been on Welfare with a child and having friends who are on Welfare with children. I do not like what this woman did. Trying to raise a child who is well nourished and warm is hard enough on welfare but women like this one make it worse for those who really need it. Fraud brings all people receiving welfare under greater scrutiny and pressure. It really should be for those who most need it.

A woman I know has ended up mixing food bank jam with water to give her kids juice for school. How does one excuse a woman who sent her daughter abroad for schooling on the doll. When there are kids who live off Mr. Noodles, ketchup, and jam. I made it through and off, and other women and children will too. But the honest ones who are really struggling, suffer when women like this selfishly fraud a system that others really need.

Women like her are also partly responsible for why people on welfare are so looked down upon. They aren't looked at as people going through bad times trying to lift their heads up, but people that are exploiting, and ripping off the system and milking peoples tax dollars.

No she fry's my socks, because I know what it like to be, and to know people who are honest, and struggling to get out of that system, because they can barely survive.


From: where the sun don't shine (most of the year anyway) | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 29 April 2002 02:49 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
... and conveniently, a story like this happens to distract Canadians' attention from the Bronfmans blowing $2 billion out of the country without paying taxes on it.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 29 April 2002 02:55 PM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, yes, i see it now!
Woman had the choice of condemning her talented child to the drudgery and hopelessness our society deems appropriate for people born to poverty, who achieve poverty (through poor luck, poor health or poor judgement) or who have poverty thrust upon them (by government/corporate decree).
Instead, she gave that child a shot at success and happiness, by a miniature version of ripping off the system that is practiced daily, in full public view, and with total impunity, by our business and political leaders.
Hanging's too good for her.

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: nonesuch ]


From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Omnigal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2282

posted 29 April 2002 03:25 PM      Profile for Omnigal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

Now that sacrcasm's a bit over the top isn't it nonesuch.

What about a shot for all the other kids on welfare? should we all fraud the system in order to give our children a shot?

My daughter wants to be a Vet. Now I don't think with where I at now I'll be able to pay her way through school. If she can't afford to do it through a student loan, or can't get one. then it would be ok for me to do what this woman did?

the question is equality here. I think all children should have a chance to do what they are good at. I think Secondary education should be equally available to all. But the fact is that this woman did something she wasn't supposed to. and that there are many children just as talented living in poverty that deserve the same chance but one woman defrauding the Welfare system does not make a right, and yes all people on Welfare suffer when the actions of a few bring suspicion, and disrespect from those that assume, or suspect that we are all defrauding the system.

I'm sorry but Ballet school is not something most people on welfare could even imagine affording. What makes her daughter more important and special than all the other kids on welfare, that as I said drink jam.

Sorry I think my daughter just as special and talented, as I'm sure she thought hers, but I'm not going to take from others who need it to give her a special advantage.

When all the kids living in poverty are clothed, fed, and well provided for, then lets talk ballet school for them all.


From: where the sun don't shine (most of the year anyway) | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rapunzel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2488

posted 29 April 2002 03:27 PM      Profile for Rapunzel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nonsuch, That sure is a lot of bluster.

So take it that you have no problem with anyone on welfare earning extra money on the sly and not reporting it, as long as they are using the money to help their children escape poverty.

Hmmmmm, how many people, do you suppose, we would have to hire to assess every single situation and make a determination whether the cause was justifiable? Then, there will be the court challenges. It will cost a fortune. Or should we just let anyone on welfare earn whatever they please and keep their welfare money too?

Sure, that's what a compassionate, caring, tolerant AND BANKRUPT society would do.

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]


From: T.O. | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 29 April 2002 03:36 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So line 'em up against the wall and shoot 'em, is that it?
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
agent007
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1189

posted 29 April 2002 03:41 PM      Profile for agent007     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
DrC, if you mean lining up all the Rapunzels and Omnigals of this world ... by all means do. I'll pull the trigger.
From: Niagara Falls ON | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 29 April 2002 03:45 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ya know, that wasn't what I meant - consider that I was being sarcastic and a little frustrated at the lack of understanding of the degree to which rich people can rip off the government for way more than a lady on welfare ever could.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 29 April 2002 03:51 PM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Sure, that's what a compassionate, caring, tolerant AND BANKRUPT society would do.
Oh yeah, and the millions upon millions in corporate tax deferments are nothing compared to the APPALLING HORROR of welfare fraud.

Get real. Welfare fraud is illegal. I'll even venture that it's wrong when committed by able-bodied capable people with viable employment alternatives, but it's a minscule drop in the fiscal bucket compared to what corporate welfare bums extort from our system.


From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rapunzel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2488

posted 29 April 2002 03:55 PM      Profile for Rapunzel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So start your own thread vilifying those evil corporate lackies that you so obviously revile. this one's about a certain big ol cheater who was caught stealing directly from the welfare system.
From: T.O. | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
agent007
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1189

posted 29 April 2002 03:57 PM      Profile for agent007     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
[DrC, I know what you meant ... but it's what I wish you had meant.]
From: Niagara Falls ON | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 29 April 2002 03:58 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And like Rebecca West said, it's chump change compared to all the tax cuts the fatcats get plus all the wanton abuse of the tax system that self-employment confers.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rapunzel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2488

posted 29 April 2002 03:59 PM      Profile for Rapunzel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
DrC, if you mean lining up all the Rapunzels and Omnigals of this world ... by all means do. I'll pull the trigger.

This is what I would expect from your ilk. Don’t forget to wear your ski mask. Its very much en vogue among the more fashion conscious social anarchists these days.

quote:
Ya know, that wasn't what I meant - consider that I was being sarcastic and a little frustrated at the lack of understanding of the degree to which rich people can rip off the government for way more than a lady on welfare ever could.

Please define “rich”.


From: T.O. | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rapunzel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2488

posted 29 April 2002 04:03 PM      Profile for Rapunzel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And like Rebecca West said, it's chump change compared to all the tax cuts the fatcats get plus all the wanton abuse of the tax system that self-employment confers.

Ah, another conceptually challenged socialistic thinker who can't tell the difference between welfare - wherein people receive money that was confiscated from other people; and tax cuts - wherein the people who pay for the welfare are permitted to have less confiscated.

Hmmm, lets see, on one hand people get something and on teh other hand they give less. Hmmm, could it be that these are seperate concepts and actually not comparable at all?

Oh well, this is the type of dishonest, diversionary rhetoric that we have come to expect from the socalist set. If ya can't facinate em with facts, baffle em with bullshit, eh Doc?

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]


From: T.O. | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 29 April 2002 04:06 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, considering that rich people are supposed to be taxed to pay for the welfare of others, and they often get preferential treatment of their investment and dividend income, AND they have access to the best tax dodgers-I mean lawyers money can buy, I would call it a fair comparison to say that every rich person that scams the tax system is just as guilty as hell as that lady on welfare.

Yet who gets punished? Welfare lady, of course.

Don't hold back, Rapunzel. Tell us how you'd like to viciously kick welfare recipients off the rolls and then yell at them to "get a job!"


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 29 April 2002 04:07 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Please define “rich”.

Anybody clearing over 100 grand a year. Keep in mind that this is the start, roughly, of the top 20% of income-earners in Canada.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rapunzel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2488

posted 29 April 2002 04:12 PM      Profile for Rapunzel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, given you have no defencse for your rather tired argument, I can't blame you for launching into the typical leftist offense.

Oh yes, I would kick em alllllll off welfare. I wouild also torture their pets and skewer their children.

Geeez Doc. You sure do fall into the hackneyd old socialist rhetoric easily. Must come with practice eh?

For the record, I support increases in welfare for the elderly and disabled, childcare for single moms and mandatory educational and work programs for all able bodied welfare recipients.

Those who have the wherewithall to help themselves must be obligated to do so. The rest deserve our compassion and help.

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]


From: T.O. | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 29 April 2002 04:16 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bully for you. But keep in mind that if you start busting out the rhetoric, so can I.

However, I choose to focus my mind on the real abusers in our country - which are corporate welfare bums and rich people who don't pay their taxes, or what they should be paying in taxes.

I'm sorry that your limited mind cannot comprehend the loss of about 600 million dollars in taxes because the Bronfmans scooted $2 billion out of the country thanks to their special connections in Revenue Canada.

Yes, it's all too easy to zoom in on the little things and ignore the big things, isn't it?


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Omnigal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2282

posted 29 April 2002 04:17 PM      Profile for Omnigal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
DrC, if you mean lining up all the Rapunzels and Omnigals of this world ... by all means do. I'll pull the trigger.

So Agent you would shoot the very type of people that have needed the system to protect the rights of this one woman. Interesting.

so how did I become a villain in this discussion.

Have any of you ever been investigated by social services?

Have any of you had them come to you house once a year to make sure that you are living in poverty?

Everyone on welfare is under scrutiny of suspected fraud. Guilty until proven innocent.

I'm sorry but those who do fraud the system really put the screws to us that don't that's where I'm coming from on this.

Not arguing from a place of wealth arguing from a place that lived to long under those conditions and was insulted and looked down upon but most of the working and upper class. And how does what this woman did contribute to that misconception?

Fry me at the stake or line me up against the wall if you like because I was not advocating shooting anyone. But I would prefer that women like her found some other means to educate their children in European ballet schools because I sure as hell had no means to do such for my child on welfare, and neither do thousands of other welfare recipients.


From: where the sun don't shine (most of the year anyway) | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 29 April 2002 04:29 PM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Ah, another conceptually challenged socialistic thinker who can't tell the difference between welfare - wherein people receive money that was confiscated from other people; and tax cuts - wherein the people who pay for the welfare are permitted to have less confiscated
So you figure that the rich folks shouldn't have to pay their fair share of taxes like the rest of us (who, incidentally, pay most of the taxes that support government services and infrastructure used by both rich and poor) while some poor welfare schlep who's nickle and diming the system should rot in the prison system.

Oh, those poor, self-sacrificing rich people.


From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rapunzel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2488

posted 29 April 2002 04:30 PM      Profile for Rapunzel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dr. Don't even speak to me of the Bronfmans, nor that dispicable CCRA ruling that robbed Canadians of their rightful tax portion of the transferred funds.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

(OK, so maybe you do have a point. Maybe.)

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]


From: T.O. | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 29 April 2002 04:47 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"So start your own thread vilifying those evil corporate lackies that you so obviously revile. this one's about a certain big ol cheater who was caught stealing directly from the welfare system."

I see this contributor comes from "T.O."

In Toronto, we have a mayor whose two children (oh sorry, he doesn't admit they are his) grew up on welfare, even though he was a millionaire businessman.

He settled with the boys' mother by paying her $27,000.00 cash. His lawyers had her agree not to allege "anywhere" that he was the father. So, the welfare application does not name a father for the two boys. (If she had named the alleged father, a blood test could have been done, and monies recovered from whoever the father might be.)

That is why it is hard to justify jail for some, while the others go free.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rapunzel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2488

posted 29 April 2002 05:13 PM      Profile for Rapunzel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Don't even get me started on that sawed-off, loud-mouthed shyster. OOOOooooo, I need a drink.

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Rapunzel ]


From: T.O. | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 29 April 2002 05:17 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
DrC, if you mean lining up all the Rapunzels and Omnigals of this world ... by all means do. I'll pull the trigger.

I shouldn't be so quick to gettem' up against the wall there buckshot. You may find yourself just a little further down that line.

This woman made a choice to steal. Ok it's not a capital crime or anything. But then all she has to do is serve the weekends due to no remorse, pay the $14.6 grand back and do a couple of hundred hours of community work. Poor baby.

Her father who seems to be missing a lot in this story took out a loan or so they say, so that the daughter could go to France. The daughter has been in a private school here before that. I guess the public school system wasn't good enough.

If you want to cry your eyes out you might want to do that for someone who deserves it.

And though the story doesn't mention it she was getting $1000 per month and paying $500 per month for rent. Utilities were included as I don't think each room had a metre. Correct me if I'm wrong but that would leave $500 per month for food right? Now according the her, she doesn't eat much at all so where is the money going? I know for that kinda cash I could eat pretty fekken good all month but then maybe I'm special.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 29 April 2002 05:43 PM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If you want to cry your eyes out you might want to do that for someone who deserves it.

It doesn't strike me that anyone here has thusfar advocated 'crying their eyes out' over this woman or her plight. No one has come out and said they agree with what she did. But I do think it's an interesting case and provides a starting point for a discussion about poverty and welfare. And why *shouldn't* a welfare kid be able to go to ballet school in Europe if that's what they want to do? I mean, why are some of us so appalled by that? Why *shouldn't* a welfare kid be able to go to private school instead of public? For that matter, why *are* there public and private schools, and why are public schools considered to be of such lower standards? Why is it perfectly all right with us that only people who have money have access to the best education in this society?

And, no, I'm not posing these questions because I want literal and/or snide responses to them. I'm just hoping to reset the tenure of this discussion somewhat. Can't we keep the sneer-factor and the personal attacks to a minumum?


From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 29 April 2002 05:51 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Can't we keep the sneer-factor and the personal attacks to a minumum?

I doubt it. I mean if someone posted a link to a story on the long suffering elite mega rich latest slight by the taxman, and responses came in with "oh how horrible and while there are scum sucking welfare mom's working under the table" how many messages would be up here taking their kick at the cat?


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 849

posted 29 April 2002 05:55 PM      Profile for lonewolf     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Whoaaa!

Why is it that right-wingers get so damned uncomfortable when their statistical and monetary-quantitative arguments get challenged with comparisons to big corporate ripoffs? Is it less of a crime if the rich commit it?

I really have to take issue with Rapunzel's

quote:
She broke the law, lied and betrayed society's confidence.

1) broke the law - who makes the laws, who has the well-placed friends and cash to get around the laws - and - IMO any law that seeks to make parental instinct to make life better for their children is not a just law

2) lied - anyone who is on welfare knows that lies are expected. In fact, the clerks love it when nothing out of the ordinary occurs so their jobs are simpler. When you are totally honest, your payments are suspended while they learn what to do with their own laws.

3)betrayed society's confidence - gimme a break. Society's only confidence in the welfare poor is that they will stay on their side of the tracks, preferebly out of site, where they belong. After all it IS their own fault - if it wasn't, it couyld be me and I don't want to think about it

Sorry but this kind of "clear your own conscience by demonizing the poor" statement is so totally lacking in compassion and understanding.

When I was at a CBC counterspin show about Mike Harris' legacy, a young tory snot tried to convince others that Kimberley Rogers DESERVED to die, since, after all SHE broke the law and any consequences of that are her own fault.

Grrrrrr


From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 29 April 2002 06:10 PM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh great, Willy went and overloaded the sneerometer. So much for keeping an eye on the levels.

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Relyc ]


From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 29 April 2002 06:15 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I just don't understand why lies and fraud are understandable for anyone. Welfare isn't great. Who could afford their taxes if welfare was great?
For that matter why is there this double standard where if those who can afford to send their kids to a private school are bad if they get a tax break to do it and the poor are good if they send their kids to private school by using fraud to get the money?

As well why is it ok to lie and cheat to get a little more and not ok to lie and cheat to get a lot more? Some of the arguments seem way off the mark to me. Welfare expects you to cheat so cheating is the way to go. Then does that mean that because Revenue Canada expects you to cheat it is right to cheat on your taxes?

I say fuck them all. If you're rich and you get caught cheating then make an example. Same goes with those on welfare and anybody inbetween.

And I find the "Why do rightwing" line little more than a baiting tactic.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 29 April 2002 06:25 PM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yup, this is the day i go over the top.
Yup, EVERYONE on welfare should be ripping off the system for all they can.
Yup, the system is about to collapse anyway, so you might as well get your share while it's still in the country.
But let's not shoot one another, okay?

From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 849

posted 29 April 2002 06:30 PM      Profile for lonewolf     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
TAXES: When taxes were first introduced, it was promised to be a temporary measure...

LIES: If a lie is a lie is a lie and everyone should be treated the same, why are so many of our corrupt politicians still in office? Why do thr rich get off with a wrist slap, while the poor get 'strung-up' (comparatively)? Why do we not hear much via the media from those charged with fraus, while governnments spend millions on campaigns and 'snitch lines'? and on and on and on

Would I had the power, I would make everyone who is rich, poor and vice-versa.

We need more compassion and understanding......


From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Omnigal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2282

posted 29 April 2002 06:36 PM      Profile for Omnigal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It doesn't strike me that anyone here has thusfar advocated 'crying their eyes out' over this woman or her plight. No one has come out and said they agree with what she did. But I do think it's an interesting case and provides a starting point for a discussion about poverty and welfare. And why *shouldn't* a welfare kid be able to go to ballet school in Europe if that's what they want to do? I mean, why are some of us so appalled by that? Why *shouldn't* a welfare kid be able to go to private school instead of public? For that matter, why *are* there public and private schools, and why are public schools considered to be of such lower standards? Why is it perfectly all right with us that only people who have money have access to the best education in this society?


Why shouldn't they indeed. Why do we have varying standards of education for the rich and the poor? high quality education should be available and free for all children, not just those with the money or those that are willing to be criminals for it.

The "free market" or "capitalist society" which we live in is not about equality for the masses. we have socialist style programs for those of us at the bottom and for that I am grateful, however, I would like to see it taken farther.

Personally I could give two craps about myself (being an adult that has already made my bad choices in life) I am willing to pay the price of living at the bottom. But the children in our society deserve every right to have access to education to help fulfill their potential.
But in this case the actions of one could negatively effect others.

and I agree with what has been said about the theft on the larger scale of mega-corps and rich business crooks, but I also see this as the same stylee on a smaller scale.

Personally I want to work towards change in our society so that all children have access to what they deserve, not through the taking from others, but from the action and rewards of having a giving, prosperous, and just society.

We all want what is best for our children the difference is what we are willing to do to get that and at who's expense.

When we deal with a multi-tiered society of haves and have-nots there will always be those who want what they don't have and those that want more than the rest, and the next generation will be the victims, and they will grow to be the criminals.

Nice choice victim, or criminal hmmm.....

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: Omnigal ]


From: where the sun don't shine (most of the year anyway) | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 29 April 2002 06:57 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I'm sorry that your limited mind cannot comprehend the loss of about 600 million dollars in taxes because the Bronfmans scooted $2 billion out of the country thanks to their special connections in Revenue Canada.

In other threads where we talk about the Taliban vs. the Northern Alliance, when we say that the N.A. are brutal and nasty, some people come back and say that they're better than the Taliban. Then we say, who CARES that they're better than the Taliban, when they're murderous and nasty too. We tell them, so because the Taliban is worse, this excuses the Northern Alliance for the atrocities they have committed?

Seems to me the same argument can be used here. We can all come up with a hundred examples of much worse crimes. Hell, there's probably nothing we can talk about where there isn't something more terrible than that happening somewhere or another.

Basically, if you want to use the argument that the Bronfmans are much worse than this woman because of the scale of the fraud, then I hope you will accept the same argument when people say that the US is blameless because other countries have committed worse atrocities than they have.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 29 April 2002 07:13 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I dunno, according to some people the US is the biggest baddie of 'em all.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
agent007
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1189

posted 29 April 2002 07:34 PM      Profile for agent007     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
An aside to Slick Willy ... you said:
quote:
I shouldn't be so quick to gettem' up against the wall there buckshot. You may find yourself just a little further down that line.

Cheap shot, no?!

For those who care to listen, that woman -- as all women receiving welfare assistance -- has been defrauded by the Ontario Government to the tune of $3500 per year ... considerably more than what she is accused of defrauding the taxpayers of Ontario.

Anyone who doubts my numbers, I leave it to your math and logic to prove me wrong. Care to take the first shot, Slick?


From: Niagara Falls ON | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 29 April 2002 07:35 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
When I was at a CBC counterspin show about Mike Harris' legacy, a young tory snot tried to convince others that Kimberley Rogers DESERVED to die, since, after all SHE broke the law and any consequences of that are her own fault.

Is this what he really said, or is this you paraphrasing him the way you did Michael Bryant when you claimed that he refused to help you because you're involved with OCAP when his actual letter said no such thing?


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 29 April 2002 07:48 PM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
As well why is it ok to lie and cheat to get a little more and not ok to lie and cheat to get a lot more?

Willy that's a fair question, but in my opinion (as someone who has been on welfare and knows many wonderful people who also have and still are) the reluctance to condemn welfare fraud comes from the recognition that the welfare system is really and truly awful to people. Yes I say thank god for it and it has helped feed many but the big glaring problem is that it gives you money to sustain yourself (barely) and *that's all*. Nothing for entertainment, nothing for personal development, next to nothing for education,nothing for transportation, nothing for personal care and grooming--in short, it sustains you, yes, and it sustains your poverty. Then there are all the little, systematically degrading and dehumanizing hoops you must jump through if you want to keep what little you get.

And then you go out into the world and discover that society and politicians resent and despise you because you're ill-groomed, uneducated, unemployed and "dependant on hand-outs." If you haven't ever been this poor, then you don't know what this does to a person.

So what I'm saying is 1) Poverty is awful and 2)Welfare alleviates poverty just enough to keep you alive, but not enough to get you out of poverty. Statistics show the the number of people who cheat on welfare is quite small, but as someone who's been there, I can certainly understand why someone would. Now I've never been particularly wealthy, but I have to say I'm less inclined to sympathize with a rich dude who steals hard earned taxpayers dollars than a poor one, particularly since I believe the government and we, as a society, need to be putting more and not less of those dollars into helping the poor. (Yeah, yeah, I'm a commie pinko, so shoot me. Wait, I mean don't really shoot me! There's been enough of that sort of talk.)

So that's why, while I'm not 'crying my eyes out' over this woman's plight, I'm also not necessarily crying my eyes out over the money she filched. She's been convicted, and the money will be paid back (perhaps by her daughter, who, as someone else pointed out, is working as a dancer now.) So the way I see it, it's kinda like a government loan by default.


From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370

posted 29 April 2002 08:23 PM      Profile for clersal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wasn't the tuition free? Therefore this evil unrepentant mother actually worked to keep a roof over her daughter's head and perhaps food. Oh my, such a terrible crime. Now this is one big welfare fraud. Off with her head.

[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: clersal ]


From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 29 April 2002 08:32 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, I found that counterSpin episode:

http://www.counterspin.tv/daily/02/03/19/1516231.shtml

And I watched the whole show - all four segments - and they didn't even mention Kimberly Rogers, much less have a guy on there who said she deserved to die. Maybe they talked about Rogers during commercial breaks or after the show was over, but it certainly never happened on the air.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370

posted 29 April 2002 08:40 PM      Profile for clersal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Michelle did you post this in the wrong thread?
From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 29 April 2002 09:25 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Cheap shot, no?!

For those who care to listen, that woman -- as all women receiving welfare assistance -- has been defrauded by the Ontario Government to the tune of $3500 per year ... considerably more than what she is accused of defrauding the taxpayers of Ontario.

Anyone who doubts my numbers, I leave it to your math and logic to prove me wrong. Care to take the first shot, Slick?


I'll be your huckleberry.

First you say the government has defrauded this paticular lady out of $3500 per year.

You made the statement. You back it up.
Will you? No because the government sets the rate which is used in the formula to calculate benefits. So unless you have some proof that the government has skimmed some of that money that is paid out under the rules set by the government about all you have to base your opinion on is moral outrage in which you are entitled but means nothing in court.

As for shooting people, you can get all hepped up on getting things started by shooting those you disagree with but what will you have to say when all those nasty right wingers are gone and you're a little less left wing than someone feels you should be? Or how about those people who think that you old dudes from the sticks drive to damn slow? Or take to damn long to cross the street.
Or just are to damn old? Does the line em' up and shoot em' method stop before that or something?

I sure don't have your years of experience yet but I do know that that method leaves only the perfect people alive. And as we all know no ones perfect.

So if you care to continue with your idea of line them up and shoot them, by all means start with me. I would suggest you pack substancial amounts of ammo because I would just stand there.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 29 April 2002 09:51 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Michelle did you post this in the wrong thread?

No, I did not. Lonewolf claimed in this thread that someone on counterSpin said that Kimberly Rogers deserved to die; I went to the counterSpin website, found the episode in question, watched the entire thing, and Kim Rogers was never discussed at least on air.

If you want to know what relevance it has to the thread, I suggest you ask Lonewolf since he brought it up.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 29 April 2002 09:57 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Willy that's a fair question, but in my opinion (as someone who has been on welfare and knows many wonderful people who also have and
still are) the reluctance to condemn welfare fraud comes from the recognition that the welfare system is really and truly awful to people.

Relyc, you seem pretty reasonable with what you said here and for the most part I agree with it.
I think you are being pretty honest and as balanced of heart and mind as the next guy.

Yep if you have to do a little fancy dancing to get out of a tight spot then sure it is alright.
If that means you get some extra cash while on welfare and say nothing about it then that's fine too.

But it seems that an idea where welfare is a life long situation has come along and taken root. Welfare is the last resort, stop gap, band-aid, hanging on by the finger nails solution to prevent people from dieing without a chance to make good.

But these days there is a problem with people thinking that it is a career. It isn't but if you try to treat it that way you will find that it sucks ass as a career.

But if shit happens, and it does to everyone from time to time, it should help you get through a couple of months of no income. By that time any reasonable person can get a job to support themselves or secure a student loan to get them through school so they can get a job to support themselves.

That is what welfare is for. And like when you use the wrong tool for the job, welfare sucks when you try to get it to cover things for a few years. Nothing will work out right and like a shelf that was installed with thumb tacks and string, it will fall apart if you think you can use it like a proper shelf.

Life is hard, harder still for some. But no one said that it is mission impossible. I have been down this road before and those who thing that hard work is the answer are usually those who put in the hard work and got something out of it.

In Canada the idea is that everyone pulls their weight. Sometimes others need a little help to get started, and so we each pull a little extra to help them get moving so we can get back to our own stone. But some feel that since some people are good at pulling their own weight, they should have to pull someone elses too.

I don't mind if I have to pull a little extra to help get someone else going. But I don't see why I should have to carry someone else for the rest of my life because they don't like to pull their own weight. It feels like people think someone is bad becuse they say take care of yourself. If you need a little help with it then I will help but I'm not your keeper.

Like the lady in the story said, she like acting. That's fine there is an industry for that. But like other specialized jobs, you have to have the right stuff to do the job.

She shows her own down fall when she says, she hopes something comes along to get her out of her life of poverty. It never does. If you want something to happen, you have to go out and make it happen. After all once in a while someone makes it big with the lotto but that isn't a very good retirement plan.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370

posted 29 April 2002 10:14 PM      Profile for clersal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry Michelle.
From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 29 April 2002 10:24 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey, no problem!
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 849

posted 30 April 2002 01:22 AM      Profile for lonewolf     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
okay, okay (sheesh what assumptions are made),

Michelle:

1) Counterspin show
- it came up a lot at the pre-show preview (where staff try to gauge who has airworthy sound bites for when and if they go to the audience)
- the show's producer deemed it better to let people like councillor Howard Moscoe get to speak more while limiting general audience time to only a few minutes and very few people
- it came up after the show went off air when people were talking about this hot topic
- I am quoting the guy directly (one of the panelists - Linda McQuaig) got into the fray to take him to task too)
Sorry - I have no audio tape, videos or signed affidavits to satisfy you

2) Michael Bryant thing - you obviously didn't read all my posts on the subject. It wasn't just the letter (which I posted only because someone wanted to see it), but the BEHAVIOUR of him and his staff: hanging up on me when I call, refusing to respond to me in any manner (email included).
And - by the way - for what politicians say, I've learned to read between the lines. Again, sorry I didn't have a spycam to record this.

3) I don't tend to question the veracity of other people's statements, why do you? In a world where no one can trust the media, governments, courts, police, etc. I'd rather trust individual personal points of view, then question the position they take rather than their integrity.

4) If you've read my posts, you know I do not hide behind aliases and have posted personal details about myself where I thought it appropriate and helpful. I have nothing to be ashamed of and nothing to defend (except my point of view).

There.

This is the last time I'll explain myself in such detail. I have a right to perspective and opinion just like everyone else.

peeved


From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 30 April 2002 01:53 AM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
But these days there is a problem with people thinking that it (welfare) is a career.

I think this is a myth. I've never heard of a single actual person choosing to go on welfare as a career, especially these days when the monthly cheque is so low, and the restrictions are more strict.

Back in high school I knew of a few people who chose to go on student welfare for a few months or a year or so, in order to get their own apartments while they finished high school.
But even they didn't see it as a long-term situation. (As far as I know, student welfare doesn't exist any more in Ontario.)

From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 30 April 2002 02:18 AM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
But it seems that an idea where welfare is a life long situation has come along and taken root. Welfare is the last resort, stop gap, band-aid, hanging on by the finger nails solution to prevent people from dieing without a chance to make good.

Slick, I think you have missed the point.

For some people welfare IS a life-long situation. If you think it is by choice I suggest you try it for a while. Can you imagine hanging on by your fingernails from the day you are born? How do you tell someone struggling to survive on $500 per month to pull up their boot straps and get to work? ("C'mon kids! Get out there and flip some burgers! We KNOW you can do it!") It's nearly impossible to get to a job interview with that income! (Public transit isn't free.)

I think the fact that the system perpetuates poverty is what we are getting at here.

I don't see how anyone could consider the welfare system a chance to make good.


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 849

posted 30 April 2002 02:22 AM      Profile for lonewolf     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Slick WIlly -

quote:
But these days there is a problem with people thinking that it is a career. It isn't but if you try to treat it that way you will find that it sucks ass as a career.

But if shit happens, and it does to everyone from time to time, it should help you get through a couple of months of no income. By that time any reasonable person can get a job to support themselves


These are exactly the arguments that distort the real experience and tremendous diversity of people on welfare:

* NO ONE wants a career on welfare - especially when they've had direct experience with the harassment, suspiscion, labelling, stereotyping, shunning and shame of it. I'd suggest anyone just visit a welfare office and see how people are treated (just go after the OPSEU strike - many services are currently non-existent)

* shit happens - This is what people who are sick of having shit happen to them and not getting the same benefits always raise. What they fail to realize is that they do not go through the same shit or the same process.

* "By that time any reasonable person can get a job to support themselves" - um, are you aware most of the people on welfare are very low-skilled or suffer from crippling disabilities?

* You also had mentioned in your original post "pulling your own weight" - This is akin to "I pulled myself up by my own bootsraps, why can't you?" ... if everyone pulled only their own weight, we would have more dead people, civil wars, turmoil and general chaos.

I don't blame people for making these statements and assumption. I blame our mean-spirited government who uses media-spin propaganda to demonize the poor for the benefit of the rich.


From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 30 April 2002 02:50 AM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Basically, if you want to use the argument that the Bronfmans are much worse than this woman because of the scale of the fraud, then I hope you will accept the same argument when people say that the US is blameless because other countries have committed worse atrocities than they have.

Sorry Michelle but you seem to be displaying a peculiar form of moral absolutism i.e. it's wrong because it's wrong because it's wrong.

Coporate fraud is a greater crime for two reasons.

1) The loss of 600 million has a greater negative impact than 14 thousand. 14 thousand isn't even enough to keep Ernie Eves in hair gel for a month.
On the other hand 600 million could build a world class ballet centre in Canada that children from lower income families could attend. There parents wouldn't have to be tempted to "cheat" the system
to help those children who have the nerve to have aspirations above their station.

2) Corporate fraud is worse than welfare fraud because it rarely goes detected let alone punished. The Bronfman debacle is only one extreme example of many. I don't remember any of those Bay st. boys that caught in the security fraud about a year ago spent time cooling their heels at the Don Jail, nor did they have to pay back the entire amount they made off with.

So I would argue that large scale Corporate fraud is somewhat more extreme and I'm not sure what the Taliban or U.S. foreign policy had to do with it.

Finally I don't know how it's possible to defraud a system that is essentially ethically bankrupt to begin with. The system was designed from the beginning to protect the wealth and power of the elite and it continues to do so. Why is it essential that people continue with the tiresome arguments of deserving and undeserving poor?

It is also rather insulting to hear that those who work hard will prevail. The majority of poor both in this country and internationally work hard and still die poor.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 849

posted 30 April 2002 03:10 AM      Profile for lonewolf     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
N.R.KISSED Bravo. Well-said.

From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 30 April 2002 08:18 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm not engaging in moral absolutism. You're assuming that I think that welfare fraud is just as bad as corporate fraud. I'm not saying that at all. I agree with you, the Bronfmans are selfish idiots who should be thrilled to pay their taxes for the privilege of becoming rich in our country.

What I was trying to say is that the Bronfmans really have nothing to do with this discussion. Just because you can think of examples of a million worse things in the world, doesn't mean that the much less worse thing you're comparing it to is hunky dory. That's all I was trying to get across. I'm saying, a is wrong. Others seem to be saying, no, a is okay because b is worse. I disagree.

Like Omnigal said earlier, in a perfect world, everyone should be allowed to go to Europe to ballet school, or everyone should go to the school of their choice anywhere in the world (well, except in Ontario where teachers don't like the idea of school choice - but that's another matter ). But in this world, I'm sorry, but I have a hard time fighting for the right for someone to work full time AND collect welfare in order to send their kid off to Europe.

As for this deserving and undeserving poor thing that you keep accusing me of, I'm sorry, but I just don't see it. I think welfare rates should be much higher for everyone. If there is anyone who is making "a career" out of welfare, then I think that has to do with a hell of a lot more factors than just laziness or ignorance. There are a million reasons why people are on welfare, and I agree that it's not a route chosen because people love it. I'm not welfare-bashing here. I don't believe in workfare because I think it only benefits Mike's corporate buddies. I just recently saw a workfare job ad up at social services the other day for a full time executive assistant - they wanted you to already have all the skills, and what would you get for it? Your welfare cheque plus child care and a clothing allowance. That would be, what, maybe $700-800 a month? Please. That's not even minimum wage - gee, thanks Mike.

I'm concerned a lot more about the way this government is exploiting women (and men) on welfare and workfare, and forcing them to live on unreasonable rates. I'm concerned about the fact that there are a lot of people who, for whatever reason, DO have to have long-term social assistance, whether their reason for not being able to work is social, psychological, or physiological, who are getting a pittance, not enough to live on, and are being punished for not being able to adapt or conform to this rather cut-throat society and economic system.

But this lady is NOT one of those people. She said she was perfectly capable of finding a job, but it wouldn't be her ideal job. Well, cry me a river. How many people are working their ideal jobs? How many people who ARE working their ideal jobs had to work other not-so-ideal jobs? And then, when she finally does have the incentive to find a not-so-ideal job, she collects benefits at the same time. We can all say, good for her, how's that for sticking it to the man. But you can bet everyone else on her social worker's client list is going to feel the brunt of that. (S)he will be that much more jaded and cynical about them, because the more bad experiences you have, the more it colours your perception. So the rest of the people who are legitimately on social assistance will lose out. Yeah, this woman is a real champion for people on assistance, I don't think.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 30 April 2002 10:19 AM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I think this is a myth. I've never heard of a single actual person choosing to go on welfare as a career, especially these days when the monthly cheque is so low, and the restrictions are more strict.

Well it would be great if it was. What I'm getting at specifically are those who if you listen to them, say school is stupid teachers are stupid, this job is stupid that job is stupid. They can't upgrade their education because of this lame reason or that one. If you want to wait for your ideal job to come knocking down your door, maybe it is an good idea to figure out what your ideal job is just so you can tell the difference between it and all the crappy jobs that are knocking down your door.

I am just guessing here but the ideal job probably requires some skills and education. Does it not make sense to gain those skills and education so when your ideal job comes along your ready for it?

quote:
What they fail to realize is that they do not go through the same shit or the same process.

Does it occur to you why? I know shit happens. Shit has happened to me before. And so I thake time to prepare for when shit does happen. I insure everything, I save money for an emergency,
I take steps to prevent stupid shit from happening as best I can. Now if my house burns down, (known as shit happening) I know that the smoke alarms work right, I know that I can get everyone out of the house, I can stop small fires from getting out of control because I have installed fire extinguishers in four places around my home, I can move my family to a hotel till I get things squared away, I get the repair work on the house done quickly because I don't have to wait to get a pay check or for someone to come along and pay for it, all the things that go into making up a home can be replaced with new things.

There is alot of different shit that can happen but if your try, you can make the odds better of preventing it from happening to you.

quote:
"By that time any reasonable person can get a job to support themselves" - um, are you aware most of the people on welfare are very low-skilled or suffer from crippling disabilities?

Yes I am. For one thing, you can go to school to upgrade your education to highschool standard for free while on welfare. You can apply for a student loan and take courses to provide you with the paper to get you in the door of most industries and prove yourself there and with a few years of hard work, you can make a pretty comfortable living. As well I would like to point out that disabled doesn't mean dead wood. I suggest that most disabled people can with some help, work and provide themselves with the things that go into making a life. As well there are tax deductions for those who care for the disabled as dependants. Not to mention services that are available to those who qualify to help make living with a disability a little easier. Granted some people have so many obsticles that employment is not a reasonable expectation. For those I feel full funding at an acceptable level is due period.

quote:
You also had mentioned in your original post "pulling your own weight" - This is akin to "I pulled myself up by my own bootsraps, why can't you?"

I never said everyone has to pull ONLY their own weight. Fact of the matter is that everyone is responsible for pulling their own weight. I also mentioned that I like everyone else has no problem with helping to get others started. This is why there are things like welfare, resource centres, free bus tickets, social workers, and more to help people get going to take care of themselves.

Lastly let me say something about flipping burgers. First it isn't a crime. Second if you feel flipping burgers is a career and the end of the road for you, then you are a little to stupid to be flipping burgers and should be back on dishwashing. If you want to manage a restaurant then you have to learn the ins and outs of the trade. That means that you have to study management techniques, the day to day chores of running a restaurant from prep work to customer service to money management to staff management to ordering to waste disposal. There is lots to learn and there actually have been documented cases of people starting out as a cook and ending up with their own restaurant or heading up a whole chain of them.

Being responsible isn't a bad thing. When you show people that you are resposible and dependable, good things happen. When you put yourself in a position to take on more responsibility and show that you can handle it then the opportunities start to come. But there is nothing anyone can do to make you that way. You have to become that on your own all by yourself.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 30 April 2002 01:33 PM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
What I was trying to say is that the Bronfmans really have nothing to do with this discussion. Just because you can think of examples of a million worse things in the world, doesn't mean that the much less worse thing you're comparing it to is hunky dory. That's all I was trying to get across. I'm saying, a is wrong. Others seem to be saying, no, a is okay because b is worse. I disagree.

Here is the relationship which makes the Bronfmans relevant:
a happens because b happened
The reason a whole lot of people have to compete for a very few crumbs is that somebody has stolen the fuggin' cake.


From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 30 April 2002 01:35 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bingo.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 30 April 2002 01:45 PM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
What I'm getting at specifically are those who if you listen to them, say school is stupid teachers are stupid, this job is stupid that job is stupid. They can't upgrade their education because of this lame reason or that one.

That sounds more like spoiled rich kids than welfare recipients.


From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 30 April 2002 02:01 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
That sounds more like spoiled rich kids than welfare recipients.

Really? Which ones? Maybe we could take a tour of a elite rich kid school and poll them to see how many think school is stupid and then hit a local public school in a poor district and poll the kids there on what they think of school.

I'm up for it.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 30 April 2002 05:22 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Two members of my family are welfare users, both of them abuse the system.

The first has never had a job, at 28 years old, abuses every kind of drug imaginable, neglects her kids and is desperatly trying to get pregnant again. Her oldest is now over seven, and the youngest is nearing that. She told me that you get extra funding for children under seven??? Maybe it means school age or something??? I'm not sure. She also has a revolving door of pets in her home because she said she gets extra money for them... that sounded kinda out there to me, but that's what she said.

The second has been on welfare for almost 2 years now. She gets jobs for 3 weeks (doesn't tell welfare office) and then "doesn't feel like getting up" and drops her jobs. Her boyfriend makes over $5000 a month and sends every cheque home.

I'm sure this is not the "norm", but I just want to point out that abuses of the system do happen, the two I know who are on it abuse it and I wonder how we could curtale it?


From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 30 April 2002 05:28 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"Don't even get me started on that sawed-off, loud-mouthed shyster."

Please note that "shyster" means crooked lawyer. Mel Lastman is not a lawyer.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 30 April 2002 06:39 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Does it really? I always thought it meant someone who was sneaky and dishonest. Learn something new every day, I guess.

I think it's pretty obvious Mel isn't a lawyer or he would have more sense than God gave a duck whenever he opens his mouth when the press is around.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 30 April 2002 06:57 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Just think Michelle, you can put "shyster" on your business cards!
From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 30 April 2002 07:09 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But don't you have to post a baby shyster paper in the back of the car window for the first year or so of chasing ambulances? heh heh Gee Michelle are you sure you want to do this? You know that you will only end up with a comb over and addicted to prep H.
From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 849

posted 30 April 2002 08:00 PM      Profile for lonewolf     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Slick Willy - and others who seem to be stuck on the whole (paraphrased) "If you just work at it..." thing. Welfare. Imagine.... (sorry for length - just skip it if you don't wanna read it)...

You're 30-something, making good bucks with a big insurance company, looking for that next promotion (after all you got a 33% raise for all those 70 hours weeks, no vacation you put in last year). Recession hits. Downsizing. Outta work - that great new project you were going to head up got cancelled, so who needs you now. Okay you say - I have the skills, I can bounce back, people need a gung-ho guy like me. Unemployment Insurance runs out. No jobs no interviews despite 100 applications a month, full work weeks on the phone following up leads, networking. Gee, you lost you job too, Sam? I'd hoped you'd be asble to hire me! Time drags on. The wife can't take it anymore and leaves. You auction off all your brand new furniture for 25% of its worth. Divorce. Lawyers more money gone. Gee I can't even pay rent on the empty house. You move in with a friend - back bedroom. No food (Hey I don't need food banks you say!) Get job, like flippin burgers. Hmmm. No money for transit. Rent is still high. Can't afford lunches or clothes. Gee I am tired. Your family says "Just cheer Up". Then one day you wake up sobbing and can't stop. You go to the hospital. Short stay. You pull yourself together and they give you lotsa drugs, say you suffer from depression, gee you have for years. Send you home - need the beds. You missed work, you're fired. You sleep a lot, the drugs help. Then you wake, worse than before. Hell with it - take all the pills try to end it, don't be a burden. You miscalculated. You wake up, your doctor says go to the hospital. Again, you do. They keep you 2 months, you fake it again and you are out. More drugs. Therapy. Lotsa support groups. You even take training to BE a counsellor. Still no job. Family says "You don't try hard enough. We all have tough times. Shit happens" But no money to help sorry. You go on welfare. They tell you it's your own fault, people worse off than you can't get welfare. Go away. You do. Then you try another way to kill yourself. Someone "kind" stops you. Hospital. Friend takes you to welfare, gets you on. Oh Boy! A WHOLE $520 per month! Okay time for the food banks, shame, embarassment. Psychiatrist tells you you suffer from disability - you've developed agoraphobia (fear of going out), panic attacks, anxiety - oh yeah, your family doctor says you had a heart attack too. More pills. Prove to ODSP you are disabled. Prove it again. and again and again. Okay you lucked out you are on. Now - windfall $920 a month. But if you work, we claw the money back. If you work full time. we'll re-assess if you are still disabled. Then your psychiatrist loses his licence for malpractice. Now - no therapy. Wait list for help is 12 months.
.... I COULD go on but I won't....

Get the picture. DISABLED. UNABLE TO WORK.


From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 01 May 2002 02:17 AM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't mean to be nasty here Slick but you seem to be demonstrating a basic lack of understanding of both the experience and the effects of long-term poverty based on a particularly distorted middle-class world view. Addressing that particular bias would take an entirely new thread.

Apart from that there seems to be a slight problem with your calcualtions. Considering unemployment is hovering around 8% and millions of others working at low paying jobs I'm not entirely sure where all these high paying jobs are going to appear from. If all of these individuals suddenly end up completing Phd's or study a trade is that going to miraculously increase the supply of these desirable jobs...um don't think so.

It's extremely insulting to suggest conditions of the job market are because the poor are too lazy or stupid.

The majority of those living in poverty are born in poverty work very hard and die in poverty.

Hmmm maybe there's another dynamic at work beyond individual responsiblity. You might want to consider this.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 01 May 2002 09:06 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
a particularly distorted middle-class world view [:] Addressing that particular bias would take an entirely new thread.

Excuse the further drift, but I would be very interested in such a discussion. One thing that especially interests me is people's different convictions about how much the money in their pay cheques or packets "belongs" to them, or is a direct reflection of the work they've done, or indeed of what they are "worth" (one reason people are often very touchy about admitting how much they earn).

Very funny, Jeff House, Michelle, et al. There's a Scots word for shyster: it's pronounced "tyuchter" or "tuchter," with the second -ch- pronounced as in German (well, as in Scots, actually, but that would sound circular). It's an all-purpose way of describing a perhaps shady operator, although I'm sure that there as here it is most often applied to lawyers.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 01 May 2002 10:17 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That's what I thought it meant - a con (wo)man.

And thanks, I'll take Slick and Trinitty's career advice under advisement. hee.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 01 May 2002 10:21 AM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
N.R.KISSED and Lonewolf, not to worry I know you are working at being civil and I thank you for that.

First the thread is about a lady who ripped of welfare to help pay for her daughter to study ballet in Germany. Justified or no, she was caught at it and has to take the consequences. Her story is I think some what typical in that she is poor, she did find a way to get around the system and found that it is unacceptable by those who set the rules for the system. I agree with that. I think she could have managed to support herself and her daughters ballet if she would have dug in and slogged through the hard shit. That is the way most people have become successful.

I don't subscribe to the theory that some people are just useless. I think everyone has some talent or ability, granted some are not very marketable but it still exists and with that, there is the opportunity to work those talents into a livable wage. There are people who can help but the first step will always belong to the person who needs help.

I mentioned before, although it was a long post and I understand that sometimes I write in a way that can put you off reading the whole thing. (my kids will attest to the joy of my lectures) That for some, the barriers are so great that employment is not a reasonable expectation. And for them I feel that full funding at a reasonable level should be a fact not fantasy.

As for the hypothetical guy who used to work in insurance, there is something wrong. I would say in this case that he can't find what it is and those who try to help seem unable or unwilling to put the time in or the resources to figure that out. But from the experiences I have had and all the people I have known I am confident of my idea that people are their own worst enemy and for the most part build the barriers they will have to get beyond and talk themselves into failure long before they actually would fail due to the system being the way it is. If that wasn't true, then I am at my own barrier of understanding why by far the majority of people get welfare for a short period and then get back in the game.

Everyone has a different view on things and sometimes some of us see eye to eye or something close to that. Sometimes what is unreasonable seems reasonable to us because we feel that in the end we will get what we want on our own terms and it will justify who we are and what we say. Some times that happens and some times it does not.

As with all generalizations saying that people on welfare are this or that is never going to be accurrate. Some people are this or that but they can never be used as a good example of what a demographic is.

I am not saying that people on welfare are lazy or stupid although there are some people on welfare who are lazy and or stupid. Some of the most wealthy people in this country are lazy and stupid. The difference is that the stupid lazy rich person isn't going to suffer the same way as the lazy and stupid poor person.

One thing is sure though, and that is that no one is going to make you successful. That has to come from you. And in order to make that happen you make choices. Those choices make up just what the chances are of you becoming successful.

I live in Toronto and this place has a way about it when it comes to success. At any given time there is an opportunity for someone with the right skills and personality to get a shot at making a lot of money. This is the dream that draws so many people to Toronto. But it also has a very hard side to it. If you can't make the money, this is not the place to be. Now I am sure that many people feel that this is not the way things should be. But it is the way they are. And those who can work with this fact of life do well in Toronto. There is a pile of money here but if you want to get yourself some of it, you have to jump through the hoops.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 01 May 2002 08:32 PM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
One thing is sure though, and that is that no one is going to make you successful.

That's not totally true. Lots of people become successful because of who they know. Sure, you can't be brain-dead and totally lazy, but there are countless skilled and educated people out there who could be successful if they had the right connections.

quote:

There is a pile of money here but if you want to get yourself some of it, you have to jump through the hoops.

But first you have to know where those hoops are. I'm willing to jump through a million hoops, kiss a million asses and sell my soul to the corporate devil, but nobody will even give me a bloody opportunity.

I'm doing everything I should be doing, and getting a decent amount of job interviews, but I'm still going from one crappy low-paying office temp to another (with a lot of downtime in between).


From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
agent007
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1189

posted 01 May 2002 08:53 PM      Profile for agent007     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
(An aside to Andy ... have you ever tried the Toronto Star? Try this.)

[edited to add link]

[ May 01, 2002: Message edited by: agent007 ]


From: Niagara Falls ON | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pimji
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 228

posted 01 May 2002 09:11 PM      Profile for Pimji   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What Lonewolf said. It's a very accurate picture of how a downward spiral happens. Some people even skip the step of getting to work for the "insurance company".

Not everyone knows how to scmooze to make a buck. I have to say that the woman to whom this topic refers did exactly what any business does. By this time it is common knowledge that cooking the books is common practice in Canada in order to get around the tax man.
The numbers in this case are ones that make sense to 90% of the population , $14,000 is half a years salary for most people while $700,000,000 (the amount the government spent on those shitty submarines which are sitting on blocks) is something which impossible to relate to.
At some point we should call a spade a spade and realize that it’s the availability of work and a basic criteria for a quality of life. Unfortunately I don’t think that Canadians, who are for the most part very well off in comparison to the rest of the world, are all that mature. We get very easily sideswiped into the “he’s getting more than me” game while the real people who are getting the most are doing so at our expense.
At least Kim Campbell admitted that there will be a steady rate of unemployment.


From: South of Ottawa | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 01 May 2002 09:17 PM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
(An aside to 007)
I've applied for #1 and #2 on that link. I had an interview for #1 when I was still in school. I haven't heard anything from them yet about #2, but I'm pretty sure they would have already done the hiring for this summer. I should be expecting a rejection letter sometime in the next few months. I'm going to apply for #3 when it gets closer to the deadline in July.

I'm going to start another thread on finding jobs in babble banter.

[ May 01, 2002: Message edited by: Andy Social ]


From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 01 May 2002 10:04 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
That's not totally true. Lots of people become successful because of who they know. Sure, you can't be brain-dead and totally lazy, but there are countless skilled and educated people out there who could be successful if they had the right connections.

As I like to say it's all about brown-nosing, ass-patting and bum-buddying.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pimji
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 228

posted 01 May 2002 11:33 PM      Profile for Pimji   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's all how a person works the system to their favour. Take the political system for example. The people who are supposed to represent citizens. It's composed of people who have no idea how to lead by any other means than persuasion and who can grease the palms of their freinds and opponents alike. Stockwell was running for PM for Pete’s sake. That says way more about us than it does about him. Although that was quickly forgotten.

Then we have our wonder boys. John Roth from Nortel, one million a year to retire, Nortel stock is $5.75 today, (Martha Stewart employs more people than Nortel) and Jozef Strauss from JDS Uniphase. Shareholders, thousands of whom where regular working people, get burned. Sure life ain’t fair but the $’s are a little ridiculous. Ex Corel CEO Michael Cowpland does an insider trade and makes 7 million, gets caught, has to pay back one million and walks away. He was laughing at us until the Ontario Securities Commission had a closer look at his sweet deal. Justice is a higher ideal but for now it about winning and losing.

So a person scams the “system” to send her daughter to dance class. So what? $14,000 is chump change. So now the government is going to spend another $14,000 to send her to jail. This must be "to send a clear message” to the other poor slobs who might get the same bright idea. Those who might think that we can all play the same game.


From: South of Ottawa | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 01 May 2002 11:43 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
First the thread is about a lady who ripped of welfare to help pay for her daughter to study ballet in Germany

This is where I disagree to me this thread is about poverty and the lack of opportunity to escape the effects of long-term poverty.

It is about the low wage ghetto that is inhabited to a large extent by women and minorities. There has been frequent discussion about this woman "waiting" for an ideal job. She was working for a flaming telemarket research firm for christ's sake how ideal is that.

I also believe this thread is about the lack of educational opportunities for low income people.
Again several people focus on Europe and ballet as though such aspirations should be off limits for the poor.

Let's remember what was reported in this case.

The woman did examine alternate options to fund her daughter.

The daughter was not accepted at a Canadian school.

Osap is not available for overseas study.

So she engaged in some creative financing as Pimji aptly pointed out.

It's also worth mentioning the nature of educational subsidies. All post secondary education is subsidized(as it should be),tuition does not pay the full cost. The majority of those receiving post secondary education are from middle to upper class backgrounds. So who recieves the most educational subsidy?

This thread is also about the differential treatment that the poor receive. That's the beauty of Capitalism not only are the poor assigned to a life of shitty jobs and degradation they need to be blamed for it and kicked in the teeth.

quote:
What I was trying to say is that the Bronfmans really have nothing to do with this discussion. Just because you can think of examples of a million worse things in the world, doesn't mean that the much less worse thing you're comparing it to is hunky dory. That's all I was trying to get across. I'm saying, a is wrong. Others seem to be saying, no, a is okay because b is worse. I disagree.

To respond to this Michelle I believe a discussion of high level fraud is relevant because it provides a context in which we can examine the way those in poverty are treated compared to those who are more fortunate. As myself and others have pointed out the wealthy get away well the poor are vigourously pursued and punished. As I stated before corporate fraud has much greater economic consequence than anything perpetrated by those on welfare. It's worthy also to note that even though the system is already ridiculously skewed in the favour of the wealthy they still feel the need(or right)to cheat.

As to the belief that this woman makes those on welfare look bad demonizing the poor is hardly a new sport. The media loves these stories and promote them as much as possible. The amount of ink spilled concerning welfare fraud as compared to corporate wrong doing is also worth examining.

I don't have a great deal to argue with most of what you say Michelle but I find it disheartening when intelligent and progressive people unintentionally use language and arguments similar to what I believe is an unjust and oppressive paradigm.

I am not concerned with those who "abuse the system" poverty is a daily struggle and I celebrate almost every means to overcome it(I do not celebrate those who prey on other poor or vulnerable).

I am concerned with the manner in which the system abuses the poor. Welfare as it exists is abusive it throws scraps at the poor while demanding that they be greatful and does everything in it's power to make it's victims feel they are responsible for their condition.

Finally has anyone considered the cost of prosecuting and jailing this woman? It's criminal!


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 02 May 2002 03:58 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"This thread is also about the differential treatment that the poor receive."

Here is another example for those who enjoy waxing indignant: the two chief executives of Cinar Ltd., a cartoon company, were found to have cheated the government of tax incentives in the multimillion-dollar range. They presented scripts, written by foreigners, for tax benefits which lawfully accrue to Canadian-written scripts.

What is notable is that, when caught, they were forced to pay the amounts back, plus interest(!).

However, no one has been charged with a criminal offence, and no one is facing a jail term. Contrast welfare recipients.

quote:
Cinar settles dispute with tax officials

By BERTRAND MAROTTE
Globe and Mail Update


Montreal — Scandal-plagued Cinar Corp. said Tuesday that it has reached settlements with federal and Quebec tax authorities in connection with millions of dollars of improperly obtained tax credits. Cinar also said it will settle with the tax authorities over millions of dollars of premature deductions taken on certain expenses.

The much-anticipated deals put an end to months of speculation about when the Montreal-based producer of the hit animated TV series Arthur would settle and for how much.

The company has agreed to pay restitution of $13.1-million — including interest plus penalties — for credits already received and to relinquish another $9.7-million in credits previously claimed but not yet received.




From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 02 May 2002 08:13 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is pretty long and pretty derailed. I'm closing it. You know what to do.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Relyc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1326

posted 02 May 2002 08:15 PM      Profile for Relyc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
N.R. Kissed, couldna said it better myself--won't even try. Thank you.
From: Vancouver, BC | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca