From: Chris Malcolm on
In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
> "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:hqhncg$75b$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu...

>> You do seem to generalize from only a few instances to "pasting"
>> your evident low regard for some of those in need to all such. As
>> I have pointed out before, there will always be exceptions who
>> may not be worthy of help - but that BY NO MEANS indicates
>> that most who receive it are not in need of it for basic living
>> resources, and also use it to the best of their abilities. Few get rich
>> on welfare...;-)
>> --DR
>>
> Hey! Show me these, "Most" of whom you speak.....I lived and worked in
> California for over 40 years, I knew many people who were welfare puppies. I
> have only known a very few who actually deserved some help from the
> taxpayers.

You remind me of an old friend. After living for a year in my home
city he told me was fed up with it and going back to London. The
reason he gave was that it was a dreadful city, full of unemployed
benefit cheats who spent all their time working out how to swindle
more money out of the government. I said I hardly knew any benefit
cheats. He said yes you do, and named two we both knew. I pointed out
to him he had introduced me to them.

In other words while he knew loads of benefit cheats, the only ones I
knew people he'd introduced me to. So it was clear that the question
wasn't why was the city full of benefit cheats. The question was why
he knew so many of them :-)

> My own experience tells me that the system is F***** up. The
> statistics of less than 2% I got from reading about the welfare system in
> papers and books....I didn't just pull it out of the air.

We have plenty of papers and books that say the same kind of thing
about the UK. And political parties too. But we also have official
statistics which show that the truth is quite different.

How do the official statistics match up with these papers and books
you read?

--
Chris Malcolm
From: Chris Malcolm on
In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:

> "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:hqflub$soh$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu...
>>
>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:EpSdnde2eMOQ71fWnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>
>> [ The usual stuff about "it's My money, dammit, and no one has
>> a right to ANY of it" excised...]
>>
>>> Yesterday I paid $18 for a 10 inch Pizza.....Eighteen F****** Dollars!! I
>>> don't know how old you are, but my dad only needed 100 grand for a
>>> comfortable retirement.....I needed a million, and my grandchildren will
>>> need 10 million.....Doesn't that mean anything to you? How much will you
>>> need? and, How are you going to get it?
>>
>> Gee, I live comfortably on a taxable income of $1700 a year (no, I didn't
>> forget a comma and a zero...;-). I don't crave things I don't need, and
>> I do prefer that some of "my" money be spent for the public good. BTW,
>> I do look around for good pizza, and here the best in town (on sale...)
>> is a large (really...), thick one, made to order with "real" ingredients
>> and
>> not made by one of the pizza chains, and it is $14 and it easily satisfies
>> two
>> people for two meals each (with nothing else needed or wanted with it...).
>> Quit bellyaching about how hard it is to live on what must be a
>> considerable
>> income with SS plus investment income from a million dollars, with no
>> money to spare for those blankitty-blank welfare slackers. Talk about a
>> demonstration of what a "Grinch" is - you do seem to define it as yourself
>> from your own writings here...
>> --DR
>>
> I don't believe your taxable income is only 1700 a year.....What are you
> doing with a computer is you make that little? But that's beside the point.
> Just because you saved so little, why do you think that everyone should save
> so little.

My taxable pension income isn't much bigger. But that's not because I
saved so little. I saved a lot more. But by the time I came to draw on
it a lot of it had turned by mysteriously legal processes into dust,
ashes, and bankers bonuses.

--
Chris Malcolm
From: David Ruether on

"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:WPydne7XcNbOEFHWnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
> "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote in message news:hqhncg$75b$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu...
>>>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:2cGdnYKPS8_3VVbWnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>> "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote in message news:hqeul0$k5u$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu...

>>>> You were lucky enough to make enough money and wise enough
>>>> to regularly save enough of it to have what you have now. Most others
>>>> "live on the edge" not by choice, but because they don't make enough
>>>> to put away anything. I never grossed more than $22k any year in my
>>>> life (and often far less), and with business expenses, the "take home"
>>>> portion was much smaller. But, with care (I've always been good with
>>>> money), I managed to own outright a decent 1100 sq. ft. house and a
>>>> cheap-but-OK car, and to amass $96k in investments. I had to stop
>>>> working about eight years ago when a "difficulty" hit me suddenly out
>>>> of nowhere. I wanted to continue working, but I couldn't be sure of
>>>> being able to meet with clients, let alone "perform" on the agreed-upon
>>>> dates. For the last two jobs I hired back-up photographers to fill in,
>>>> if needed, which left too little profit to bother with, so I went on SS
>>>> disability, and a few years later, that converted to a modest SS income,
>>>> essentially my only source of income (but it is sufficient for my needs).
>>>> Now, as it happened, I have come to meet many on welfare or disability,
>>>> and NONE is on it just because they don't want to work. There are
>>>> some who cannot afford even the inexpensive "Gadabout" transportation
>>>> service for the elderly and disabled, or modest meals away from where
>>>> they live (I set up a local "kitty" for $5 to be given such people when
>>>> needed, since they need the money more than I do), people who are
>>>> blind and/or have hearing difficulties, people who have mobility problems,
>>>> people who have various diseases (up to ALS), and people who "just"
>>>> have bipolar disorder (which can be just as crippling as any physical
>>>> problem). I have a form of autism, but I have managed with it since I
>>>> found a way to make money without having a regular job (my last
>>>> attempt was in 1962, I think...). So, quit with the "stingy" and the "if
>>>> I could do it, anyone could do it" attitude and look at the conditions
>>>> many real people live with who need the available extra help, and quit
>>>> fixating on the few exceptions (and one needs a treat ONCE in a while!),
>>>> and, BTW, my sister (long story...) uses a cell 'phone 'cuz it's cheaper
>>>> than any other type if used very sparingly. Please be more generous in
>>>> your outlook, if not with your money...
>>>> --DR

>>> I am saying, and have said several times before, that the people I am talking about are not those who are disabled to the extent
>>> that they find it impossible to work. I never wanted to cut these people off.....As a matter of fact, I would like to cut off
>>> the other 98% (a good statistic) who have all their fingers and toes and mental capabilities and could work, but don't, and give
>>> this money to those of whom you speak who can't work for one reason or another. The people of whom I speak, who could work but
>>> don't, ate (and have been) subsidized by the state of California all of my life....I have met many of them, and they didn't work
>>> because they were better off economically by just sitting and letting the California government cut them checks every month.
>>> There was no "sliding scale" payments that would (or might have) given them any incentive to work. I keep telling you this, but
>>> you keep reverting to my being, "An unfeeling conservative who doesn't understand the plight of others who are less fortunate
>>> than I." Lets take the idiot who lived next door to me in Menlo Park for about 5 years. He had a dozen children, and he lived in
>>> a three bedroom house. Je was on disability, because he had a "nervous condition that made him uncomfortable when he worked for
>>> a living" (No lie) All he did was sit home and drink beer.....After they moved out (owing 5 months rent) I met the owner's son,
>>> who was fixing up the place for re-renting to someone else, and needed me to help him install a new toilet. He showed me the
>>> back bedroom.....It was piled floor to ceiling with empty beer cans....This guy lived in a three bedroom house, with a dozen
>>> children, and he used one of the three bedrooms for a garbage dump for his beer cans! Incidentally, while they were living
>>> there, his wife had another ked, so there were thirteen kids when they skipped out of town.....The local police department knew
>>> all about this guys kids....They lived under a standing order curfew.....If any of them was seen by a Menlo Park policeman out
>>> after dark, he (or she) would be arrested immediately.....they got all their spending money by stealing whatever they could get
>>> their hands on, and selling it to whomever they could for whatever they could get for it.......

>> You do seem to generalize from only a few instances to "pasting"
>> your evident low regard for some of those in need to all such. As
>> I have pointed out before, there will always be exceptions who
>> may not be worthy of help - but that BY NO MEANS indicates
>> that most who receive it are not in need of it for basic living
>> resources, and also use it to the best of their abilities. Few get rich
>> on welfare...;-)
>> --DR

> Hey! Show me these, "Most" of whom you speak.....I lived and worked in California for over 40 years, I knew many people who were
> welfare puppies. I have only known a very few who actually deserved some help from the taxpayers. My own experience tells me that
> the system is F***** up. The statistics of less than 2% I got from reading about the welfare system in papers and books....I
> didn't just pull it out of the air. Oh sure, there is some excuse they all have for taking the money....They are better off than
> they would be working, in some cases. But that is a fault of the system. There was no incentive for them to work at all. No
> sliding scale to give them some help in finding a job that would improve their situation. No end to the help they were getting, so
> they would have an incentive to learn a new trade and prepare to leave the welfare rolls. It was a clear case of giving them a
> fish every month instead of teaching them how to fish.....

I included it above, and also in my original post of 4/18 - but if you
cannot read it for some reason, I quote it below, "Now, as it happened,
I have come to meet many [as in, a couple of hundred] on welfare or
disability, and NONE is on it just because they don't want to work.
There are some who cannot afford even the inexpensive "Gadabout"
transportation service for the elderly and disabled, or modest meals
away from where they live (I set up a local "kitty" for $5 to be given
such people when needed, since they need the money more than I do),
people who are blind and/or have hearing difficulties, people who have
mobility problems, people who have various diseases (up to ALS), and
people who "just" have bipolar disorder (which can be just as crippling
as any physical problem). I have a form of autism, but I have managed
with it since I found a way to make money without having a regular job
(my last attempt was in 1962, I think...). So, quit with the "stingy" and the
"if I could do it, anyone could do it" attitude and look at the conditions
many real people live with who need the available extra help, and quit
fixating on the few exceptions (and one needs a treat ONCE in a while!),
and, BTW, my sister (long story...) uses a cell 'phone 'cuz it's cheaper
than any other type if used very sparingly. Please be more generous in
your outlook, if not with your money..." Also, those on disability ARE
given incentives to work - one can make a rather noticeable amount
of money for a period of time without losing the disability payments
so that one can train for and/or try out for work. And, many disabled
people I know do work. But, I'm now getting tired of reading and
responding to your repetitious and quite "ungenerous" views - I have
better things to do...
--DR


From: David Ruether on

"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1ZednQ4Bz7B-GFHWnZ2dnUVZ_sadnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
> "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote in message news:hqflub$soh$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu...
>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:EpSdnde2eMOQ71fWnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...

>> [ The usual stuff about "it's My money, dammit, and no one has
>> a right to ANY of it" excised...]

>>> Yesterday I paid $18 for a 10 inch Pizza.....Eighteen F****** Dollars!! I don't know how old you are, but my dad only needed 100
>>> grand for a comfortable retirement.....I needed a million, and my grandchildren will need 10 million.....Doesn't that mean
>>> anything to you? How much will you need? and, How are you going to get it?

>> Gee, I live comfortably on a taxable income of $1700 a year (no, I didn't
>> forget a comma and a zero...;-). I don't crave things I don't need, and
>> I do prefer that some of "my" money be spent for the public good. BTW,
>> I do look around for good pizza, and here the best in town (on sale...)
>> is a large (really...), thick one, made to order with "real" ingredients and
>> not made by one of the pizza chains, and it is $14 and it easily satisfies two people for two meals each (with nothing else
>> needed or wanted with it...). Quit bellyaching about how hard it is to live on what must be a considerable income with SS plus
>> investment income from a million dollars, with no money to spare for those blankitty-blank welfare slackers. Talk about a
>> demonstration of what a "Grinch" is - you do seem to define it as yourself from your own writings here...
>> --DR

> I don't believe your taxable income is only 1700 a year.....What are you doing with a computer is you make that little?

That was in fact my taxable income this last year, and I paid exactly
$60 total in taxes to the Feds and NYS - and, as I said, I live well
(which for me is likely very different from what you consider important
for "good living" - but "Grinches" always seem to want more than they
already have, which I don't).

> But that's beside the point. Just because you saved so little, why do you think that everyone should save so little. Can't you
> imagine there are people in this world who aspire to be better off than you are, and are willing to save more and/or work harder
> than you do? Or, like a typical liberal, you think that everyone should live exactly as you do, and by God, we should make a law
> that forces them to.......

This is nonsense, as you would know if you had read my post in
which I listed my major assets. I have done very well, given my
modest lifestyle. I don't care what others want to do (whether wasting
their lives chasing money, or living life the best they can) - but I've noticed
that it does seem to be the conservatives who are most interested in telling
people how they should live, often while at the same time pratting on
about how the "gov'mint" is limiting their own rights, and using scare words
like "socialism" (words that don't apply to any real threat) to get people to
follow them. Anyway, enough...
--DR


From: David Ruether on

"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:mpCdneiv6tHzHlHWnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
> "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote in message news:hqf05v$mf2$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu...

>> Well, if one catches a "news" network in enough deceptions,
>> outright lies, and in actually actively supporting a political party
>> and a fringe movement enough times, ALL its credibility is lost.
>> Some of us consider our time watching material that has been
>> proven worthless (or much worse) MANY times as time
>> foolishly spent... Or, for the simple, if "A", "B", "C", "D", and
>> "E" generally provide reliable news information, but "F"
>> demonstrably does not, then one ceases at some point
>> wasting time (except for entertainment, perhaps), watching "F".
>> --DR

> Only if you are a screaming, long-haired liberal who refuses to think for himself.....I find Fox a refreshing change from the
> "Obama is Jesus" crowd. At least Fox calls him out on his many mistakes. Are you aware that his administration is full of Marxists
> and fellow travelers from the 60's? Are you also aware that the democrats are trying to spend your grandchildren's money much
> faster than they will ever be able to pay it off? Fox seems to be the only ones who are concerned about this.....You certainly
> won't hear about it by watching Brian Williams and Katie Couric.

Y u h, r i g h t . . . .
Gosh, I guess the sky really is green, and grass really is purple.....8^)
--DR