Hatred of People On Welfare

[Sinister Intents]

Could someone please explain this to me? When someone talks about "welfare queens" taking advantage of the system, and other related stuff. It's always seemed very classist, racist, and sexist

[consuming negativity]

Say that you and I agree to dig a 6x6 hole together, but then I do all the work and you chill out and watch. Would you expect me to be upset? Yeah, probably.

That's the logic involved at its most basic level.

[Slavic]

Say that you and I agree to dig a 6x6 hole together, but then I do all the work and you chill out and watch. Would you expect me to be upset? Yeah, probably.

That's the logic involved at its most basic level.

A logic that is ultimately flawed because it assumes those who work and those who receive welfare are benefiting from the system equally while one works and the other doesn't. People on welfare are poverty stricken and have to live in the most rundown homes and neighborhoods, unsurprisingly since there is no work to be had in such neighborhoods.

The catch 22 about welfare is that if you wish to get off the system, you will actually make less money as soon as you come off it which can cause another plummet to poverty. If for example, you were to receive a $1 raise at work which would put you over the welfare threshold, you could see upwards of hundreds of dollars of housing, food, and medical subsidies dissapear for a whooping $40 extra a week.

Unless you get lucky, people who are on welfare typically stay on welfare due to all these issues. That's why you get your run of the mill "lazy" slander. "Get off welfare and get a job lazy asses". If only such a thing were so easy.



Also I've also found it very hard to get onto welfare when I needed it. There was a period of months were lack of work and medical bills was causing me and my ex to reach the breaking point of maintaining our budget. We tried to apply for food stamps but the process was ridiculously complicated and we didn't get our denial letter until months after the fact.

This also reminds me of disability welfare. My ex, same ex, suffered a stroke which resulted in chronic mental and physical issues. It took 3 years and two denials until she was finally approved during which she was only able to work at most a month at a job before getting "laid off" due to her illness. The most ridiculous aspect of the process was that she had to prove that she could not work for a year after the accident occurred. How the Fuck can you just Not work for a year unless you have some kind of familial support system. The amount of time it takes to get state help just guarantees that you will be living on the street within a month.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Could someone please explain this to me? When someone talks about "welfare queens" taking advantage of the system, and other related stuff. It's always seemed very classist, racist, and sexist

I think the term 'welfare queen' within the context of American political discourse is a covert way to insult women of color. Whether they will admit it or not.

[Slavic]

I think the term 'welfare queen' within the context of American political discourse is a covert way to insult women of color. Whether they will admit it or not.

Precisely, since those on welfare tend to be the most marginalized people in society; a black woman in America is pretty fucking marginalized.

[consuming negativity]

A logic that is ultimately flawed because it assumes those who work and those who receive welfare are benefiting from the system equally while one works and the other doesn't. People on welfare are poverty stricken and have to live in the most rundown homes and neighborhoods, unsurprisingly since there is no work to be had in such neighborhoods.

The catch 22 about welfare is that if you wish to get off the system, you will actually make less money as soon as you come off it which can cause another plummet to poverty. If for example, you were to receive a $1 raise at work which would put you over the welfare threshold, you could see upwards of hundreds of dollars of housing, food, and medical subsidies dissapear for a whooping $40 extra a week.

Unless you get lucky, people who are on welfare typically stay on welfare due to all these issues. That's why you get your run of the mill "lazy" slander. "Get off welfare and get a job lazy asses". If only such a thing were so easy.



Also I've also found it very hard to get onto welfare when I needed it. There was a period of months were lack of work and medical bills was causing me and my ex to reach the breaking point of maintaining our budget. We tried to apply for food stamps but the process was ridiculously complicated and we didn't get our denial letter until months after the fact.

This also reminds me of disability welfare. My ex, same ex, suffered a stroke which resulted in chronic mental and physical issues. It took 3 years and two denials until she was finally approved during which she was only able to work at most a month at a job before getting "laid off" due to her illness. The most ridiculous aspect of the process was that she had to prove that she could not work for a year after the accident occurred. How the Fuck can you just Not work for a year unless you have some kind of familial support system. The amount of time it takes to get state help just guarantees that you will be living on the street within a month.

That's why, though. Because people who are poor and working can't get any welfare, so they know, and rightly know, that anybody who has ever actually gotten the assistance they need did so by lying like hell. You're never going to get shit unless you fudge your numbers and leave out what they can't check.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

You can't get on welfare because the budget is slashed whenever possible for political gain and there are millions of people without any work whatsoever, not because everyone on it is lying. Where are you getting these talking points from?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

In my experience, everyone has one anecdotal story of a cousin/friend/friend of a friend, who lived nice and easy off everyone else while on welfare, then they extrapolate this and assume that it must be the case for everyone on welfare. I've never met this person, the people I know on welfare live in flea and bedbug ridden apartments in the worst part of town, or in run down trailers up in the mountains. If people got to see what living on welfare actually looked like, no one would be resentful because it's miserable and degrading.

[Futility Personified]

I think of it as the cowardly bully's mindset.

Shit on those beneath you, because they are beneath you so it's fine.
Don't ask why you aren't getting paid any more than you are though!

Of course, if you have some people who refuse to pitch in no matter what, who simply refuse to contribute, not out of neccessity but of choice, then something is going to go wrong. But in a capitalist system, if you can find a way out of exploitation to a life of relative comfort without shitting on anyone else, then who can judge you? The idea of living on benefits or welfare as being some huge hoot is also quite frankly fictitious and insulting. Try saying "more money more problems" with a straight face when you are hugely into debt and can't leave the place you live for something better.

It's a narrative that has been fostered by the powers that be to divide us. It just upsets me that so many are so bitter and vindictive, or at least at the wrong people! That said, capitalism is a large abstract concept and socialism is at this stage practically a fairy-tale haunted by men with rippling beards, whereas the people who are 'that sort' that you 'always hear about' in the 'newspapers' are a tangible living target for disdain. There are a hundred reasons to not want to work. Not working also has an absolute shedload of it's own challenges.

I comfort myself knowing that when any vestige of employment protection law is eradicated they will know only self-loathing, and maybe a tiny bit of guilt for how they behaved before. Before they murder me for my last 50p.

[#FF0000]

Precisely, since those on welfare tend to be the most marginalized people in society; a black woman in America is pretty fucking marginalized.

yeah the thing is, though, that more white people are on welfare than black people. the racial aspect is important though, because white Americans will willingly take a hit if they believe a black American will take it worse.

[Slavic]

yeah the thing is, though, that more white people are on welfare than black people. the racial aspect is important though, because white Americans will willingly take a hit if they believe a black American will take it worse.

If you are talking gross figures that is correct, but look at percentages.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/07/12/the-politics-and-demographics-of-food-stamp-recipients/

Minorities still make up the bulk of welfare recipients in relation to their total population. Which lends to the fact that marginalized people are more likely to be on welfare.



Minority women in particular are far more likely than their male counterparts to have used food stamps. About four-in-ten black women (39%) have gotten help compared with 21% of black men. The gender-race participation gap is also wide among Hispanics: 31% of Hispanic women but 14% of Hispanic men received assistance.

[Hatshepsut]

Say that you and I agree to dig a 6x6 hole together, but then I do all the work and you chill out and watch. Would you expect me to be upset? Yeah, probably. That's the logic involved at its most basic level.


The catch 22 about welfare is that if you wish to get off the system, you will actually...plummet to poverty... If...you...receive a $1 raise at work which would put you over the welfare threshold, you could see upwards of hundreds of dollars of housing, food, and medical subsidies disapear for a whooping $40... Also I've also found it very hard to get onto welfare when I needed it.


Could someone please explain this to me? When someone talks about "welfare queens" taking advantage of the system...
I remember a story circulating when I was a kid, about a black lady who won a pink Cadillac as a Mary Kay Cosmetics distributor, who supposedly drove this car to the welfare office to collect atop the income she wasn't reporting. Wikipedia credits the royal term to the Chicago Tribune's George Bliss and notes it was associated with Ronald Reagan's presidential runs. I think Reagan mostly let others do his tough talking for him, and didn't say much about the issue himself; Wikipedia seconds this assessment.

The top two quotes show the two biggest conundra, of resentment by employed against those on relief, a classic wedge Marx identified. And of the difficulty of attaining self-sufficiency in the USA if you're completely down and out. Welfare can indeed provide better than barrel-bottom jobs, as it comes with that package of housing, food, and medical assistance in addition to the small cash grant.

But one must recall Welfare Reform, which since 1997 has time-limited or otherwise restricted all these benefits except for housing. In Utah, the lifetime cap is 3 years. Able-bodied adults without dependents are pointedly excluded from nearly all social assistance except food stamps, which they may receive for 3 months in any 3-year period, and a few units of housing they can access if they survive 3-year waiting lists. This is true regardless of how little income they have, a thing not often mentioned called "categorical eligibility." We see that welfare isn't just "for the poor," it's for a select subset of the poor. God help you if you're in default on child support or student loans, or have a drug conviction record. Rules vary in other states. A majority of welfare recipients don't actually live in public housing. And the bulk of Medicaid goes to elderly persons, often for nursing home expenses.

State and federal Medicaid spending totals about $450 billion according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. This is about 3% of U.S. GDP, not too bad given we Americans endure the world's most expensive health care. The other forms of assistance, welfare, food stamps, and public housing, total roughly $120 billion or 0.8% of GDP.

A small aside on Obamacare: It doesn't insure everyone. You can work at a job with no health benefits and earn too little to qualify for subsidized insurance in the exchanges. So, you go to the emergency room and owe $1200 if you bust a toe, and forego that hemorrhoid operation in favor of sitting on an O-ring cushion.

Despite the USA's modest efforts at public provision, hatred toward those on welfare is exploited by an endless succession of those wanting "fend for yourself under the tender mercies of Marketplace & Charity," now notably the Tea Party faction within the Republican Party.

[The Intransigent Faction]

I know here in Ontario, a Conservative premier in the 90s introduced some measures to crack down on "welfare fraud" despite the fact that instances were statistically so rare that those policies actually cost more than could have been saved. I wouldn't be surprised at all if similar things happened elsewhere.

It's all ideological (and yes, systematically racist) bullshit to put the blame on people on welfare for their poverty, instead of on the capitalist system.

[LiaSofia]

Could someone please explain this to me? When someone talks about "welfare queens" taking advantage of the system, and other related stuff. It's always seemed very classist, racist, and sexist

I wrote a long, ranty blog post about this a while back. As Communer said, the logic goes, 'I am a person who works so I deserve a reward - people on benefits don't work so they don't deserve a reward - I should not have to contribute towards their reward.' I would argue that the nature of work has become so divorced from what is actually useful or helpful that it's not at all comparable to the digging a hole metaphor. Of course, there is racism and classism involved as well and I blame that on the media's biased representation of welfare recipients.

It is also a divide and rule tactic. Make sure the people's anger is directed at each other, then they'll be too distracted to notice that the true cause of their problems comes from above, not below.

Usually the people who are complaining fit into two categories:

- Middle class people who have never been in that situation themselves so don't know what it's like to actually be on welfare/benefits. In this case their viewpoint usually comes from ignorance.

- People who had a difficult time financially but are now doing better because they were one of the lucky ones. They believe that their luck was actually 'hard work' and that anyone can rise above a bad situation if they take the right opportunities.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

For a couple of years, I was living on $200 a month in welfare benefits. Luckily, I had family to live with.

[John Nada]

Besides racism and sexism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperity_theology and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis Think about it. You can only get welfare(in the US and increasingly more countries) if you can prove you "truly need it". Then, they make you come back every few months to confess your sins confirm you are broke. This gives the impression that there must be a small amount of money available for welfare, and not that the bourgeoisie make a shitload of profits off the back of workers. So for those receiving or likely going to get welfare, they think that others unworthy of it are taking money from the pot.

And for the labor aristocracy, petty bourgeoisie and would-be lottery winners, they think,"I work hard, and these parasites are taking may tax-dollars!" Someone below them is a potently replacement or thief. For the bourgeoisie you'd would literally have to try to go broke, probably assume that's how it is everywhere.

The bourgeoisie pushes this hatred of the poor, criminalizing them. The need a reserve army of labor and an underclass to push wages down and apply pressure to the proletariat. However, they don't want riots and rebellions because of too many people dying in the streets. So the poor get a stigma, handcuffs and breadcrumbs. Enough to barely get by, but just enough to still see the bottom of the abyss.

[motion denied]

Social Darwinism.

[blake 3:17]

I know here in Ontario, a Conservative premier in the 90s introduced some measures to crack down on "welfare fraud" despite the fact that instances were statistically so rare that those policies actually cost more than could have been saved. I wouldn't be surprised at all if similar things happened elsewhere.

It's all ideological (and yes, systematically racist) bullshit to put the blame on people on welfare for their poverty, instead of on the capitalist system.

It was actually the NDP, our social democrats, government who brought that in.

The Harris Conservatives slashed benefits by 21.6% and the rates in actual dollars, never mind cost of living/inflation, are about 10 or 12% below what they were before 1995.

It can be easy to get angry at people on welfare/assistance/benefits -- jeezus I can get mad at myself over this stuff!!! It is very frustrating when you're working hard and seeing people who aren't working getting or appearing to get preferential treatment.

And as pointed out above, it can be especially aggravating for people who are working part time and then earn a few extra dollars just to see those dollars disappear.

What we as socialists need to do is several things -- 1) Fight for full employment at a living wage. 2) Fight for social assistance, shelter allowances and other subsidies for those who need them. 3) Fight for free universal social programs (health, education, child care, recreation, etc) so that there's no appearance that the poor are getting "special" treatment.

[The Intransigent Faction]

It was actually the NDP, our social democrats, government who brought that in.

The Harris Conservatives slashed benefits by 21.6% and the rates in actual dollars, never mind cost of living/inflation, are about 10 or 12% below what they were before 1995.

It can be easy to get angry at people on welfare/assistance/benefits -- jeezus I can get mad at myself over this stuff!!! It is very frustrating when you're working hard and seeing people who aren't working getting or appearing to get preferential treatment.

And as pointed out above, it can be especially aggravating for people who are working part time and then earn a few extra dollars just to see those dollars disappear.

What we as socialists need to do is several things -- 1) Fight for full employment at a living wage. 2) Fight for social assistance, shelter allowances and other subsidies for those who need them. 3) Fight for free universal social programs (health, education, child care, recreation, etc) so that there's no appearance that the poor are getting "special" treatment.

Yeah, that's what I was referring to, but the NDP (all parties for that matter) share in the blame.

[consuming negativity]

The root idea is that assumption that people are all bad.

"I'm on welfare, but I actually really need welfare. Those other people, though; the majority of people don't need welfare."

Assuming the negative about other's intentions.

"He doesn't have a job, he's lazy" versus "He doesn't have a job, I wonder why" or "He doesn't have a job, I hope he finds one soon"

Bad vs. neutral vs. positive

[Lord Testicles]

Whenever I hear some invertebrate worker complain about benefits I always think "here comes the craven wage slave dripping with sweat, bad blood & tears."

[Futility Personified]

I always think of an uncle-tom type. "I -like- being exploited damn it! Why can't they justify my own misery by colluding in it!"

[Lowtech]

The majority of people have no idea how the economy works nor why poverty exists. They have the misinformed notion that social programs like welfare have a negative effect on economics. These are the same people that believe the NASA budget is a waste while giving the military budget no thought at all. Whereas the military budget in the US dwarfs all other spending. In addition, they have a negative view of welfare while being oblivious of substantial corporate subsidies. The problem is debating these people is a colossal waste of time.

[Loony Le Fist]

I think the term 'welfare queen' within the context of American political discourse is a covert way to insult women of color. Whether they will admit it or not.

^ This.

Black women have long been the scapegoat for the ridiculous welfare queen meme that has been so deeply embedded into the US's political intellectual distortion lexicon since Ronald Reagan. Just like the crack baby epidemic that never happened, also designed to demonize black women. Check out Dr. Carl Hart's work if you want to look into that one. Black women have also nearly always been portrayed far more hypersexually than thier non-black counterparts. It's like nothing has changed and the myth of the savage negro thrives. Especially in the US south, where the term nigger is often used between white friends to describe a negative encounter with black people--followed by the typical qualification, "I'm not a racist, but..."

[The Modern Prometheus]

I have been sick at times and needed welfare and i didn't get even close enough to be able to share a house or something much less rent my own place. The wait for housing is years so i just stayed at my parents. It's not a easy life by means and yes people on welfare are discriminated against mostly by people who subscribe to the notion of pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.

They are people who think they are privileged for the most part and usually come from the middle or upper classes i have found. Anyone that's lived in a poor working class inner city neighborhood or lived in a poor rural area would have a better grasp; on poverty then the more privileged. The right wing as well as some Liberals talk about pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps but what if you have no boot straps? There are plenty of people who have no opportunities in live.

Also i think in this day and age everyone should be given enough to live a half decent life and have their basic needs met. We certainly have enough wealth to make sure that everyone has a place to live that's not a crack shack, heating, food, access to free health care, free education, etc. Noone should have to be sick or hungry in this day and age for no reason other then greed.

[mojo.rhythm]

It's a rhetorical weapon used by the ruling classes to make the masses fight with one another.

Obviously it's not just an American phenomenon. Here in Australia, people on welfare—or bludgers, which is the Australian vernacular for them—are constantly demonized and scapegoated to serve an ideological agenda. This has been a tactic of both major political parties (Labor and Liberal) since time immemorial, but especially since the late seventies and early eighties. Liberal has always been hard on the anti-poor rhetoric, but when Reagan took power the Labor party went full-blown out-and-out right wing as well.

Fast forward to today, it's terrible as ever. During last year's federal elections, Bill Shorten, the leader of the Labor Party, was seriously considering mandatory boot camps for the long-term unemployed. I mean, COME ON! Maggie Thatcher could not have thought of this shit.

So how do you respond to people who scapegoat the unemployed?

There are several ways. First, you can remind the person that high levels of unemployment are almost always a result of insufficient economic demand, not a lazy populace. Here in Australia, there are seven unemployed people looking for work for every existing job vacancy. So that means that, even if every single vacant position was filled, there would still be 6/7 of those people who are unemployed. Bottom line: there are simply not enough jobs out there. It doesn't how well-groomed or how ambitious or how desperate for work those people are—if businesses don't want to hire any labour, there won't be any jobs available for them.

Also, I'd much rather live in a society with so-called "dole cheats", than live in a society where people who can't find work and don't have family members to turn to have to scavenge rubbish bins or beg on street corners to survive.

Finally, these conversations are a good opportunity to make the case for a Universal Basic Income to replace unemployment insurance. Instead of having means-tested welfare payments which are conditional on being unemployed, simply give all citizens of the country a universal basic income as a guaranteed right. That would solve any and all so-called moral hazards. The UBI idea is even supported by right-wing libertarians like Charles Murray (not that this should be a reason for you to accept it :)).

[Spatula City]

Whenever I run into someone upset about welfare, I point out that it's probably cheaper than actually developing the kinds of social programs that would be needed to educate, rejuvenate, inspire, rebuild or otherwise positively change the poverty situation in the US, which has gotten much much worse than it should be.

Any culture that worships wealth is also going to vilify the poor, the uneducated, etc... and I agree that the scapegoating is easy because capitalism is hierarchical and the successful are rewarded over and over for exploiting the weak.

I see welfare as a way of doing the barest minimum to prevent outright revolution while also keeping the booming prison industry going.

[Red Son]

In the UK, the right wing tabloids love bashing 'spongers' and the jobless who dare to claim any money from 'us' / taxpayers / the self-righteous hypocrites who read this shit. The vitriol is thrown at anyone who claims any money, especially single women with more than a couple of kids who live in 4 / 5 bedroom 'mansions'. They always find a provocative picture of the sponging scumbag to hammer home just how evil they are and how much we should hate them for stealing our hard-earned.

Sorry, I see these stories every day and the poor-hating, bigoted, hypocritical bullshit of these 'journalists' makes my fucking blood boil.

[Hatshepsut]

....pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps but what if you have no boot straps?

And even if you do have bootstraps, it won't help you. The physics doesn't work. Try it yourself, by pulling upward on your shoelaces or straps as hard as you can. You won't levitate an inch! :lol:


Here in Australia, people on welfare—or bludgers, which is the Australian vernacular for them—are constantly demonized and scapegoated to serve an ideological agenda....

First, you can remind the person that high levels of unemployment are almost always a result of insufficient economic demand, not a lazy populace.....

It's not surprising to see this ploy used everywhere to divert attention from the major causes of unemployment within the business cycle. And the USA economy seems to have entered a phase shift brought on during the 2007-09 financial blowhole, where higher levels of unemployment may become normal.

U.S. official unemployment stands at 6% now - but we've had to go to a zero interest rate to get that, and it was only about 4% in 2005 when money rates were much higher. Then of course there's the small lie the unemployment rate itself tells - everyone who looks for work knows it's a lot higher than the stated figure. :ohmy:

[GaggedNoMore]

This is a major peeve of mine.

I am both physically and cognitively disabled. (weak muscles and A.D.D) I also have chronic depression, coupled with anxiety and panic attacks. Medication has given me some relief, but as you'd expect it's not a cure all. I still can't work a regular eight hour work day. I lived in BC for several years and I applied for and was granted disability status. Unfortunately when I came back to Ontario, lost those benefits (each province has its own program). So I've had to apply all over again. But for the time being, I have to survive on welfare; which is only $656 a month here in Ontario for someone like me (single with no dependents). That barely covers the cost of the monthly rent for most places in Toronto, with almost nothing left over.

And also I've received my share of flak from some people as to how I don't "look" disabled; or some have said things to the effect of "well you're still able to ____, so there must be SOMETHING you can do" or "Well you did "X" in the past, so what can't you just do that again" or "Why can't you just ask for accomodations that you need?" Me - "Because most employers don't WANT to, that's why!"

I swear people seem to think that unless you're all these things - blind, deaf, mute, paraplegic etc - that you're not REALLY disabled and just another person whose milking the system. :glare:

[Mr. Piccolo]

The majority of people have no idea how the economy works nor why poverty exists. They have the misinformed notion that social programs like welfare have a negative effect on economics. These are the same people that believe the NASA budget is a waste while giving the military budget no thought at all. Whereas the military budget in the US dwarfs all other spending. In addition, they have a negative view of welfare while being oblivious of substantial corporate subsidies. The problem is debating these people is a colossal waste of time.

Great answer. You can explain that business and the wealthy receive more welfare, direct or indirect, than the poor, or that same forms of welfare like food stamps, are actually a pro-big business subsidy used to help prop up demand, but most of the people who talk about "welfare queens" don't care. These people have an emotional and often racist attachment to the myth. They need to feel that they are being victimized by having to pay taxes "for those people."

It is counterintuitive for most people to think that their taxes are more likely going to prop up the system of their capitalist masters because they have been taught that capitalists are rugged individualists who have no need of government aid.

[Servia]

Would these welfare programs be present during the DOTP or early socialism? Would their need eventually be eliminated as communism evolved?

[GaggedNoMore]

Your answer is predicated on the assumption that everyone here shares your particular ideology and worldview.

I for one believe that once the state has been abolished and people are self-governing and people interact with one another on a voluntary basis, there will be no need for such programs.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

For those who are curious:

The whole 'welfare queen' myth can actually traced back to one person.

Linda Taylor

http://i.crackedcdn.com/phpimages/article/7/4/6/346746_v1.jpg

Back in the 1970s, Linda Taylor was a professional con artist who conned the U.S. Government out of hundreds of thousands of dollars. She didn't do this by simply popping out kids and then waiting for the checks to come in. She was a career criminal who used dozens of false names, addresses and telephone numbers to collect food stamps, Social Security, veteran's benefits, etc.

She was also involved in child kidnapping and was accused of multiple murders, but she was only ever charged with the welfare fraud.

Basically, all of the conservative ire over so-called 'welfare queens' can all be traced back to Ronald Reagan using this single, solitary example as the reason why welfare was evil and needed to be done away with.

[Ravn]

Any culture that worships wealth is also going to vilify the poor


"Wealth" expropriates from labor. Poverty is the result of that.






I see welfare as a way of doing the barest minimum

It's a subsidy for landlords.