FeloniousMonk wrote:
There are certain levels of it that are required. I don't mind my tax money going to build roads because I use those roads. I don't mind my tax dollars paying for the CDC because I've seen first hand how crucial that organization is. On the other hand I strongly oppose having to pay into social security when I will never see a penny of that money nor will I ever see a penny of welfare or government cheese. It's one thing to spend money on infrastructure, defense, health issues, etc and a completely different one for my money to support a mother of eight that can't close her fucking legs and watches soaps all day long instead of fucking working.
There's a lot of, what shall i call it, principle(?) there. But I think it doesn't take into account a lot of real-life issues. First, if she didn't get that money, her kids would very well not have sufficient food to eat. Now she might go get a job, but it's doubtful she'd be able to make enough to feed said eight kids. And go to school to get a better job? Not with eight kids at home. And even if she gets the job, her kids could very well end up at home alone, leading to not only a child endangerment issue, but also a potential crime "threat".
So what do you prefer? Odds are some of your tax dollars (or pennies?) are going to pay for some portion of that woman's life no matter what the solution.
Though, of course, I think your image of who these people are is, in general, wrong. My girlfriend qualified for food stamps this year (though she didn't take them, as she has me) yet has a job. And a friend of mine in Boston DID take food stamps last year, as working for AmeriCorps doesn't pay enough to live. And though they both might have problems keeping their legs closed (much to my happiness in the first case), they don't sit at home all day watching soaps.
Nor have 8 kids, thank god.