|Funny Pictures||Funny Videos|
|Funny GIFs||YouTube Videos|
Rank #21209 on CommentsLevel 248 Comments: Doinitrite
OfflineSend mail to VikingSharkPANCH Block VikingSharkPANCH Invite VikingSharkPANCH to be your friend flag avatar
latest user's comments
|#58 - Much cute So adorableness||12/03/2013 on 1st Year||+1|
|#16 - Picture||11/29/2013 on what would you do???||0|
|#47 - 7/10, I knew where it was going within the first 5 lines. …||11/29/2013 on /K/||0|
|#61 - Party on good sir||11/08/2013 on Fuck your Friendzone||0|
|#60 - Picture||11/08/2013 on Fuck your Friendzone||0|
|#38 - Thats awful bro, sorry for that. Hope that ******* … [+] (1 new reply)||11/04/2013 on Who put that turn here?||+2|
|#33 - Downhilling FTW. Any MTBers here on FJ? [+] (7 new replies)||11/04/2013 on Who put that turn here?||+5|
|#148 - **** it. Lift, listen to heavy metal, enjoy your … [+] (1 new reply)||10/25/2013 on Feel for you bro||+2|
|#138 - Here is the problem. No one recognizes the ******* … [+] (10 new replies)||10/15/2013 on Hold mah baby||+2|
#140 - childofnephilim (10/15/2013) [-]
I understand your position and sympathize. Would you care to engage in a dialectic in regards to how one would effectively identify those failing to engage in due diligence whilst on welfare? If you are unable or unwilling, could you propose who should be paid to engage in that dialectic?
#153 - Katzie (10/15/2013) [-]
My god you sound like a douchebag. Use more obscure words when they're more suitable than others or in a legal document, not just for the sake of using them.
Anywho, my government demands evidence they are actively seeking work, and after a while finds them a really shitty job and takes them off the welfare if they refuse to take it.
#151 - thebannedzombie (10/15/2013) [-]
Random audits no different than tax audits we have to go through to make sure we are giving the government our share to throw at these lazy fucks for those receiving any form of government aid. This audit would check four things.
A. Is the reason you can't get a job complete bullshit, or is there a good reason for why you can't get a job which your "handicap" does not inhibit. I.E. if you are missing an arm, you can always be a telemarketer
B. If you are unemployed, are you actually making an effort to get a job I.E. you aren't sending in half assed applications just to meet the current quota for unemployment
C. If you are receiving extra benefits to care for your children, are they being properly cared for? Are you really fit to be a parent?
D. Must be clean of all drugs, alcohol and tobacco. Is not allowed to buy or consume any of these products. If you need to beg for money that other people worked for, you sure as shit shouldn't be blowing it on expensive (and in some cases illegal) vices.
If you fail category C:
Your children will be taken away from you, and you will cease to receive any benefits associated with dependents. This decision can only be reversed when you no longer need to apply for any government aid.
If you fail A, B, or D:
You will be permanently barred from receiving any form of government aid. No welfare, no medicare, no food stamps, no social security, not a damn thing. The only recourse would be army barracks styled housing only available for those willing to do menial labor in exchange for absolute bare bones room and board. (see picture).
This plan is flawless.
#158 - childofnephilim (10/15/2013) [-]
Do you function under the premise that this solution will, by necessity, create some overhead? That is to say positions where people will conduct the audits, drug-testers, data entry, and administration to oversee the positions as a whole? In context of the American system, this sounds like an expansion of the sub-branches in charge of authorizing the release of funds.
I would be interested in discussion the functional definitions by which we would determine "half-assed" applications. I could see "joke applications" being marked as such. I could see applications that are intentionally illegible as being marked as such.
Vice is a difficult concept to properly define. You include specific drugs, nicotine and alcohol. What about other luxuries? Eating at restaurants? manicures/pedicures? Hairstylists? Spa services? While I agree that recreational drug use should be restricted, I think that it is a contingent of the 'luxury on someone else's dollar' problem and that we cannot detect for many of these other luxuries without infringing on the privacy of the individuals receiving benefits. Would you like to discuss the possibility that those receiving benefits should have certain other entitlements suspended?
Your last point is one where I must conditionally disagree. Manual labor for bare bones accommodations if that is all they want. Better than prison or being homeless. Offer vocational training and a job placement program. In exchange for taking the classes, doing job shadows, etc. they are upgraded to better facilities, better meals, etc. Does this sound agreeable?
#163 - thebannedzombie (10/15/2013) [-]
To further expand on the housing concept:
Communal and gender segregated barracks style bunk rooms
Communal and gender segregated showers and bathrooms
Jumpsuit style uniforms provided for free
Absolute zero tolerance for weapons, drugs, alcohol, tobacco, violence, assault and harassment
Facility would be staffed entirely by boarders (or ex boarders for management and minimal security positions)
Boarders would be leased out (for labor) to other government affiliated agencies or charities. picking up trash on the highway, janitorial work in city buildings, forest conservation products, bus drivers, highway construction, national park trail maintenance, crap like that. See WPA for inspiration for possible applications
Boarders would be paid minimal amounts most of their "pay" would go towards room and board of a unique currency only redeemable at a "Barracks Store" of sorts, which would carry things deemed to be necessary to an extent, but which has to be earned, business casual dress for interviews, buss passes, crap like that
Vocational Training would be in addition to providing labor to earn you keep, however there would be an effort made to line up the work you are doing to earn you keep and your field of training
Job Placement programs would mostly be for low paying government jobs, however private business would be free to cooperate with the system.
After acquiring a "real" job, boarders would have the option of paying for their board themselves in exchange for not participating in the menial labor. a cheaper alternative to moving out immediately. They would be treated no different than any other boarder
This program would be open to any member of the public, and would replace homeless shelters and subsidized housing.
Most of the budget not funded by leased labor would be provided by savings from the relieved welfare system.
#162 - thebannedzombie (10/15/2013) [-]
Yes, there would be overhead and our already overly large government would have to hire on a few more employees, however what I had in mind was more akin to Tax audits than delinquent probationary drug testing. I.E. one in twenty recipients will be tested in the course of a year. Low chance of being called in, with a very high penalty for being caught.
The American unemployment benefits system (obtained separately from welfare) has a few already existing bare-bones requirements. One existing condition is that they send out x number of job applications per week. My system is that in the event of an audit, any job applications the unemployment recipient use to count towards his job-seeking quota that were not sent out with the genuine intention of attempting to get the job would be in violation of this requirement.
My reasoning for attributing such a high penalty to such a minor offense, is that the majority of people receiving unemployment benefits are also receiving welfare. If they wish to get paid by the government when they are not working, they should at least make finding a new source of income their "job". If they aren't willing to spend a few hours a day making an effort, they shouldn't receive the additional unemployment benefits.
The luxury items I singled out are heavily taxed by the government in the form of sin tax laws. www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/26/banking-on-sin-states-profit-as-taxes-rise-on-vice/?page=all First news page that had something worth linking on the matter. I would add gambling to the list. Restaurants and pedicures are also cheap change compared to cigarettes and booze, and at least the former ones are harmless.
No. The vocational training and job placement would be a privilege in itself. Offering incentives beyond the opportunity to better themselves would only encourage abuse of the programs. The facilities have beds, showers, basic clothing, and nutritional food. It's the safety net.
#164 - childofnephilim (10/15/2013) [-]
It is without difficulty that I can say that you and I agree on several accounts.
I don't mind your described auditing system so long as it is not 'sold' to the public as a way to save money on these programs. This is strictly a rule enforcement protocol to attempt and reduce incidents of violation and abuse. (5% chance of being called in. Not odds I would personally play against. I assume you would allow additional instances for abuse reported by third parties?)
What would you define as a genuine intention? I would place the threshold for violation somewhat high to account for variation in job application experience. Alternatively, I would propose that one could offer workshops to train people how to effectively apply for work. Therein you could lower the threshold for variability that would constitute a violation because everyone was offered a similar skill set to work from. Additionally, what would you allow in your definition of "looking for work." I was unemployed briefly, and I would show up to various places I had applied on a weekly or bi-weekly basis to ask about my application status or openings. Would you allow people to log 'leather to pavement,' style job hunting? Have a form signed off by managers at various establishments?
So anything we tax as a luxury/vice (drugs) and casinos. Would this system include cooperation from the IRS to determine if they have any earnings declared from casinos? That is the only way I could see that being regulated. Open to ideas of course.
I disagree on some, but not all of your points in terms of housing. I have business to attend to, however, and will seek to return to this conversation in due time. In the mean time, thank you for having this discussion with me. Your perspective is appreciated.
#165 - thebannedzombie (10/15/2013) [-]
A report by a third party would prompt an audit, but no more or less attention would be given to the individual during the audit, and the report would not be used as evidence. Regardless of reports except in the case of child negligence, however that system is already in place a person cannot be audited more than once in a year.
The "relieved welfare system" i briefly mentioned in comment #163 was mostly referring to most of the participants in the barracks program being former welfare recipients. Rather than the program actually saving money, I just meant that it would be used differently.
I would state my intention as the betterment of the American people. Fear of being caught as well as a solid safety net is a rather firm foundation.
For the unemployment abuses, I didn't mean a single infraction would result in a failure, I had in mind more habitual failings. The measure would be sheer volume of genuine Here we define genuine applications as fully completed forms turned in with the intention of actually receiving the job. I.E. you answered the questions properly rather than just scribbling some BS on the form. applications made. The applications can come in any form as long as there is some record, and of course if you are offered a job you must accept it.
Job hunting aids are already part of the unemployment benefits system.
I honestly hadn't considered using IRS records and resources, however that would be the simplest way to check for gambling. In addition to that, the alcohol posses a problem as there is little trace left in the system after 48 hours. I will have to give that some thought.
|#34 - Picture||10/14/2013 on Flawless logic||+3|