Vacation? I am an "expediter". LOL!! Vacations my left foot. It is FAR more likely that I will break down out there and get to experience the area that way.
Update: $2M Michigan lottery winner defends use of food stamps
- Thread starter Freightdawg
- Start date
Vacation? I am an "expediter". LOL!! Vacations my left foot. It is FAR more likely that I will break down out there and get to experience the area that way.
Vacation? I am an "expediter". LOL!! Vacations my left foot. It is FAR more likely that I will break down out there and get to experience the area that way.
To think on the Northwest side we have a liberal hunting season....
Not that the rules are relaxed...I mean they actually hunt "Liberals"
2 per season is the bag limit....LOL
To think on the Northwest side we have a liberal hunting season....
Not that the rules are relaxed...I mean they actually hunt "Liberals"
LOL!! Yeah, but that is the "dry side" of the State, is it not? Besides, most of your "liberals", for lack of a better term, live in the eastern half do they not?
Yep..we have the brown side and the green side....
or brown for conservative....green for liberal...
The line seems to run down the Missouri River...
See, and I thought that the "brown side" was called that because it is SOOOO dry out there, and the "green sides" was called that because there is a bit of water out on that side.
You know brown for dry and green for wetter.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
But the problem isn't with him, he paid into the system a huge amount more in taxes than he will collect so it isn't an issue for me. What is the issue is not having an asset based adjudication to see if someone actually qualifies. Many will run to the welfare office to collect while at the same time continuing to pay for the new car, new clothes and crap for the brats.
But they'd let you have some assets to a certain value....if your car payment was too high...tough luck...if your rent was too high...better find a cheaper place....everything has limits....
"But the problem isn't with him, he paid into the system a huge amount more in taxes than he will collect so it isn't an issue for me. What is the issue is not having an asset based adjudication to see if someone actually qualifies. Many will run to the welfare office to collect while at the same time continuing to pay for the new car, new clothes and crap for the brats."
It matters to me. A person of integrity would not be worried about the legality of this. A person of character and integrity would have stopped collecting so called safety net money when it was not longer needed. It should be an asset based system, it is not. That does not relieve him of moral obligations. Just because something is "legal" does not make it right.
It matters to me. A person of integrity would not be worried about the legality of this. A person of character and integrity would have stopped collecting so called safety net money when it was not longer needed. It should be an asset based system, it is not. That does not relieve him of moral obligations. Just because something is "legal" does not make it right.
How much $ could he receive in a year.....not enough to make.worth the hasle...( to me) considering his net worth...what it says to me is ..greed...greed..greed...root of all evil......mAybe his p.o'd he had to pay all the tax on his winnings....he is trying to "re-coop"...???.
Posted with my Droid EO Forum App
Posted with my Droid EO Forum App
Last edited:
Let's not forget two important things here. One, he told the called the Department of Human Services of his lottery winnings immediately after receiving the money, and they told him to keep using the Bridge Card. Two, he took the lottery money in a lump sum payment, which left him 850,000 after paying $1.15 million in taxes to the state of Michigan. It's not like he got $2 million and paid no taxes and is continuing to mooch off the state. Here's a man who is literally footing the bill for his own Bridge Card. If anything, he's gone above and beyond his oral obligations.
Last edited:
A honest man of integrity and character would have turned that card back into the State no matter what they told him. A MAN would be ashamed to do this.
ONLY 850,000? I could live the rest of my life on that without a problem. Must be hard on him.
Oral obligations? I don't want to know.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
It seems to me he is doing something that I think is actually illustrating the problem - from an interview I saw of him he seems to be making a point to change something that needs to be change by actually taking advantage of the system and not being shy about it.
What moral obligation?
Maybe his moral obligation is trying to get it changed and by being out in the open with all of it, he may be a bit more moral than a lot of others.
BUT let's talk about a moral obligation and social responsibility for the greater good. I give you one thing, I don't like the idea of people who are hiding incomes to collect social security or have pensions that exceed their needs while collecting social security which they don't need. I think there is a really immoral value driving those who can justify using the system while using the lame excuse "I paid into it so I deserve".
What good is complaining about one aspect of social care on the subject of a person who paid a crap load of money into the system by others who paid a small percentage into the system and expect money back.
The thinking is flawed and many think there is some social contract between us and the government that says they deserve but I don't see too many ... nope strike that ... I don't see anyone other than me saying we need to look at all of it with the idea it won't last much longer with such greed and selfishness involved.
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
I was being general, because like the boxer someone mentioned, going on relief of any kind is a shameful act; theft. Now, if your kids are starving, you do what you have to do for the moment, but like the boxer, you consider it a shameful thing, you never admit it to anyone, and you get off it and pay back what you stole as soon as humanly possible. And you pledge to never do it again or let any family member ever get into the same spot.
I occasionally hear of parents who use their children to help then steal. They hide something in a baby's diaper bag our even tell their child to act as a lookout out distract the clerk. They're teaching their children to be criminals. That's what parents do if they use food stamps or WIC or ADC. If I were ever in that situation, I'd make sure the kids never found out, and if they somehow find out anyway, I'd sit them down and explain to them how shameful it is to steal, and how ashamed dad and mom are to have to resort to stealing from strangers to feed them. I'd make sure they never forgot that little family meeting and that they'd forever be too ashamed to let it happen to them.
Thing is, it's not set up so you're limited to collecting what you put in. If you take so much as a penny, you're taking somebody else's money, money they didn't give you.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
So social security is stealing?
It is on the governments part. I don't care what they say. They have been ripping us off for years.
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
Which part? I have no idea what you are talking about here. I believe that the government is a den of thieves. Nothing more.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
OK maybe you got lost on the way there so here it is again.
BUT let's talk about a moral obligation and social responsibility for the greater good. I give you one thing, I don't like the idea of people who are hiding incomes to collect social security or have pensions that exceed their needs while collecting social security which they don't need. I think there is a really immoral value driving those who can justify using the system while using the lame excuse "I paid into it so I deserve". Pretty much the same can be claimed that the people are a bunch of thieves by using this excuse
What good is complaining about one aspect of social care on the subject of a person who paid a crap load of money into the system by others who paid a small percentage into the system and expect money back.
The thinking is flawed and many think there is some social contract between us and the government that says they deserve but I don't see too many ... nope strike that ... I don't see anyone other than me saying we need to look at all of it with the idea it won't last much longer with such greed and selfishness involved.
So when Amonger said
it seems to validate my point with those three paragraphs. In other words (could be related to this business) if someone is making a lot of money and hiding it to avoid limiting their social security checks, they are immoral by the same standard used to judge this guy and his need to prove how screwed up the system is.
But you get a retirement allowance don't you?
Me? I have no government retirement other than what little Social Security will not pay me because our government spent every penny of the massive surpluses that the system ran for years. It is now just another, bankrupt, welfare program.
Nothing that the system started out as has remained.