News Tribune

	Central Missouri's information you need! advanced
	Login \| Contact Us \| Site Map \| Archives \| Photos \| Alerts Saturday, July 04, 2009

Print this story | Email this story |

Comment (No comments posted.) |

Rate |

Text Size

Our Opinion
People must take responsibility for choices

Advertisement

Published: Wednesday, April 9, 2008 3:02 PM CDT

Dear Editor: In the last year all we have heard about is people being cut off of Medicaid. I would like to know when are we going to make people take responsibility for the life they choose.

I feel when you get benefits whether it be Medicaid, food stamps, WIC or whatever, it should be mandatory that you keep a job even if it is just a couple of hours a day to continue getting your benefits.

People will say the children will be the ones to suffer. That is when the state needs to step in and say you need to either work to keep your benefits or work to pay for medical care, food, baby formula or whatever your child's needs are and if you cannot do this, we will put them (the children) with someone who is willing to work and support them.

It is time to teach our children how to be productive citizens. We are starting to make non-custodial parents pay or go to jail. What about the other parent who sits and waits for the check to come and lets the state pick up the rest. I feel both should work or both go to jail.

It takes two people to make a baby, it also takes two to support the baby.

Tina Smith, California


Our Opinion Other deaths also deserve attention		Our Opinion Rampant crime must be halted

Article Rating

Advertisement

Before commenting read the News Tribune Forum's policies and procedures.
Thanks.

oriley wrote on Apr 21, 2008 10:00 AM:

" I would like to say that this family member shouldn't be able to keep getting pregnant and keep having children when she lives off the system. It is a vicious cycle. She held a job once. I have a problem with it because it is abusing the system. If you are not mentally capeable of holding a job, how are you mentally capeable of raising human beings (children)? And for that matter, they have cell phones and computers and such...I find that a luxury for living off the system because you can't work. Maybe it isn't my tax dollars per say, but my tax dollars do benefit someone out there. So I stand strong...what a crock! "

douglas12 wrote on Apr 21, 2008 7:05 AM:

" very well put "

boscoe wrote on Apr 20, 2008 9:27 PM:

" The real abusers are not the few individuals receiving benefits when they are not elligible. The real abu$ers are the PROVIDERS who overbill Medicaide/Medicare for services provided to disabled or indegent clients, or who bill for services not provided, not needed, or of very poor quality.

The abuse is the providers of services, many of which have large staffs who are very saavy at billing Medicaide or Medicare for maximum profits. Check out the administrative salaries and other administrative costs of the providers of service; many have lobbiests and special interest groups to protect their cash cows at the expense of the clients and taxpayers. That is the HIDDEN ABUSE no one talks about. "

douglas12 wrote on Apr 20, 2008 10:33 AM:

" oriley, first off you most likely are not even paying any taxes that are going to help these people. I do agreee with reform. However, people always vilify the ones whom abuse the system and you never hear about the ones whom are helped up. Biggest problem is providing these ones whom abuse the system a means of change before support, lets find a means to help them support themselves in which I feel that most people would rather have. Of corse there will always be deadbeats who abuse it, but lets make sure we don't disregard the vast majority that would rather be self supportive. Just giving and giving will never work, help them find a way. "

oriley wrote on Apr 18, 2008 1:00 PM:

" I can relate. I have a family member with two kids, her and her boyfriend do not work, she thinks she is pregnant again now. They draw SSI and get all the assitance in the world. I am a single parent with a job for many years and I couldn't qualify for anything...go figure. So I see who the sytem helps, those who won't help themselves. It infuriates me to watch her not take care of her kids even though she is home all day and I have to figure out how to survive raising kids on one salary because I choose a better life. Yet, my tax dollars support her lazy carcuss...arrhhh..isn't life grand! "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 18, 2008 12:29 PM:

" One thing with the system too that alot may not know is that if you have a child under the age of I think not sure 6yrs one parent can stay home. Wouldnt it be nice if those of us that truelly worked hard could stay home with our kids too?? Its called a choice...get up off your butts and go to work...Its one thing to give a hand up to people (and there are those who need it) and then theres the hand out...give a person a meal they keep coming back for more...give a person a fishing pole he feeds his own family and learns a trade... "

NBEB wrote on Apr 17, 2008 3:45 PM:

" go_fish wrote on Apr 15, 2008 2:12 PM:common sense might suggest there is a mental/physical disability that you are unaware of or another legitimate reason. It's not reasonable to make a judgement without knowing all of the facts.....
I know two of them, as well as their families. The only conditions they suffer is called lazy! Both are totally capable of holding down jobs. Their own families are ashamed of them. FYI, the last time I called DSS I asked to remain anonymous. That didn't happen. And there was a backlash because of it.
"

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 16, 2008 12:33 PM:

" douglas12 i agree 50/50 across the board that is why i said take the cost of raising that child and split that cost...dont look at this person makes this and that person makes this...it should be about the cost of the child. Each person chose their own job and worked to get where they are...to say because someone makes more they should have to pay out more on a child is wrong...it took 2 to make that child so 2 should pay equally for that child "

douglas12 wrote on Apr 15, 2008 4:52 PM:

" Ndn, we are arguing the same point. What I was getting at is it should be 50/50 across th board. If the parents have equal time and provide everything equally, support should be awarded based on the difference of incomes to make things fair. Point I was making is that the system is not set up that way. Even with all things equal, the mother can make significantly more money than the father and he would still be required to pay support even though he makes less money and pays just as much. Thats the injustice I was speaking of. "

go_fish wrote on Apr 15, 2008 2:12 PM:

" NBEB wrote on Apr 15, 2008 9:51 AM: "Hey go-Fish, I know of 3 people in free housing, all on welfare, and not a single one has a job! Explain that one to me!" I don't know the people and I don't know what the rules are other than what I read on the DSS web site, so NO, I cannot "explain that one" to you. However, common sense might suggest there is a mental/physical disability that you are unaware of or another legitimate reason. It's not reasonable to make a judgement without knowing all of the facts. If you have a question about their situation, I say call DSS and report what you know. "

NBEB wrote on Apr 15, 2008 9:51 AM:

" Hey go-Fish, I know of 3 people in free housing, all on welfare, and not a single one has a job! Explain that one to me! "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:32 PM:

" i think we all know that things come up that cant be seen coming and we say not us never...just remember some people actually use welfare as a steping stone to step up and get a better lot in life...its those that sit on their butts expecting a handout that make the system bad... "

concerned one wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:18 PM:

" People should take responsibility for the choices that they make, but the state needs to take responsibility for allowing the Non-custodial parents who do not pay their court order child support, but are allowed to receive benefits. There are a few of those out there in this state. "

abomb wrote on Apr 14, 2008 4:33 PM:

" No one has mentioned the plans for mortgage bailouts. That’s legislation that directly says that people don’t have to take responsibility for their actions. "

go_fish wrote on Apr 14, 2008 4:12 PM:

" Most of you that are judgemental about this topic appear to be very uninformed. You need to go to the dss.mo.gov and look at reality. According to that site people do have to work while recieving benefits, assistance is time limited to 5 years, and cannot have been convicted of drug related offenses. The program says it moves people from welfare to work, not to give someone an indefinate free ride. As for child support, I've heard that the people who complain the most, are the present wives/partners of non-custodial parents who see "their" money going to the ex or who's partner is facing enforcement action. I wonder if that is the motivation for the letter from Ms.Smith. "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:38 PM:

" mp6500 I agree with that 100% and i also think if someone is caught doing drugs at a job they need to be let go...Im not talking prescriptions either Im talking real street drugs or alcohol on the job as far as that goes...and if they are getting welfare at that time cancel or if they go for welfare after that say NO to them... "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:36 PM:

" It was a way to get that to stop...I think there are some though that find a way around this...hope not but sure there are some...I think making them go to a job training program is a great idea...the other sad thing is look at the ages of most on welfare...alot are very young mothers...go take a day and sit at that office and look around...it is heartbreaking...we need to teach our teens that its not ok to get pregnant...we need to also teach our males that if you get a girl pregnant you have to be responsible for that child now you cant say well its not mine and run the other way...theres starting to be too many that want to play but dontwanttoPay "

mp6500 wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:34 PM:

" I say drug tests for people on welfare is a great idea too. Do drugs = No more money. "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 14, 2008 2:34 PM:

" Grace Harvey I agree and I disagree...for some it seems to be away of life for others it is a step to where they need to go...I have seen some that never thought they would be on any kind of welfare that have to go on...for reasons such as their job ends without warning (no income), medical for their children even if they are working full time because they dont make enough and their job doesnt offer those benifits...I have seen the system do good for some but what is bad are the ones that abuse it and do keep having more and more kids just to get more money...what alot dont realize is after 5 yrs you cant get assistance anymore no matter howManyKids "

Grace Harvey wrote on Apr 14, 2008 1:31 PM:

" I say one child on welfare and have sterilization for the alleged father and the mother.

This is the only way you will control people on welfare. As long as they keep having children, more money is given. It is sad that the majority of the kids in this type of environment will grow up and be another welfare recipient because they know no better. "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:13 PM:

" I think more than anything instead of saying this person makes this and that person makes that...look at the cost to raise that child and split that cost...its only fair...I also believe that people who are on welfare need to go to get a job even if it is the smallest job the problem is that once they get a job even at minimum wage if they were said to be getting that child support check whether they get it or not it is counted as money received and that is what determines how much support they get...when the two adults who made these children step up and learn to take care of their own then we wont have these problems...it works both ways "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:10 PM:

" douglas12 first off I said many not all...and second of all it took two people to make that one child. So why if the mother/father who has custody of the child is making more than the other parent why do you feel they should pay 100%....the costs for that child should be split 50/50 no matter what...that means...household costs, toys, school supplies, school lunches, clothing, food, medical, medicines, after school activites, ect...I never would take more than the 50% of the costs to raise a child. If when together as a couple you were both putting that 50% in why just because now that you arent why should the other parent pay the 100%...not saying you do this...but there are many who do... "

NBEB wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:26 AM:

" But I agree, some guys are getting shafted. They not only see the kids, they are excellent father. They should have some slack. There should be a cap on it or something! If she's sitting eating bon bons, saving her child support to take the kids on trips while the child father STILL has to buy clothes, lunch money...then I totally agree. Those women do not deserve the huge amounts they get. I only asked for a fair shake, and I still get nothing. "

NBEB wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:22 AM:

" I totally agree on drug testing. If they are using, cut them off, if they keep popping out kids, cut them off. Make it hard on them! As far as child support, I never get child support! I've went years without it. And now that we have prom, car payment, car insurance, lunch money, school clothes, school pics...man, it sure would be nice if they would at least pick the guy up. But nope! he's walking around scot free and owes me over $12,000 in back child support. Should I claim my daughter on taxes, you bet ya! he has never carried her on insurance, helped with a co-pay, bought her school supplies....Nothing! "

NBEB wrote on Apr 14, 2008 9:16 AM:

" I agree. People on welfare should have a job. They can work at Goodwill, Sheltered Workshop, soup kitchens...They should not be allowed to set around and say I can't get a job because I have kids. WRONG! I was a single mother of two! I got up, got my kids ready, got myself ready, dropped the kids of at daycare, Elem. School, Bus stops...and I have never had a high paying job. I was a single mom doing the best I could. I've used food stamps, DFS gave me way too much! That is how some get obese. I told DFS it was too much for myself and kids. "

douglas12 wrote on Apr 14, 2008 8:58 AM:

" Like your idea AGO, I personally feel there are just as many healthy people that aabuse the sick time as unhealthy. I think your idea would give incentive to everyone regardless of physical prowess. However as much as I agree with Haser on many issues, weight regulation should have nothing to do with people's job positions. "

ago151 wrote on Apr 14, 2008 7:42 AM:

" I can see were Hasher and other's are coming from, although I disagree to some extent. How many times have you seen people completely abuse the system of State assistance. Overall I think it is properly used but those who are seen abusing the system stick in our memory more because it angers us. Instead of worrying about BF% why not once a year a employer pay an employee back for his/her sick time. Even if it is at 50% of an hourly wage, it would give an incentive to stay healthy and not use sick time as vacation time. "

xbluidgurlx87x wrote on Apr 14, 2008 12:20 AM:

" Hasher...you really need to turn the filter on between your brain and your fingers. I am overweight. I have had a job since I was 15 (I am almost 21.) I have never called in sick in the 6 years I have been working. I have very good blood pressure and blood sugar. I have no health problems to speak of, and I receive no assistance. But in your thinking, I should lose my job, thus I would need to get some form of assistance as well as medicaid from the state. How the h*** is that helping the situation any?! "

douglas12 wrote on Apr 13, 2008 9:55 PM:

" today most plans by the courts are set where you have equal time and everything is payed equal, so why when one makes more do they still get support? Know the facts before you vilify people. And about weight, I have no problem with heavy people, I do have problems with the negativity that many times comes along with overweight people, most of them are unhappy with themselves and are always trying to diet. I just feel no matter who you are, if you don't like something about yourself, quit complaining or making excuses and change it or find out how to love who you are and live with it. If your heavy, it is a choice you make. "

douglas12 wrote on Apr 13, 2008 9:51 PM:

" NDN, so how do you figure when a parent such as myself that has my child about half the time is not having to support her. Must provide the equal amount of hosehold, equal medical. Pay for all the clothes, school supplies and activities if my daughter is to be involved in anything is complaining about support. It's just this ridiculous presumption by mothers that think they are entitled to support even no matter the fact that they are doing much better. I have always agreed to pay more than I was required to get more time with my child, however I was just making a point of how the calculation is unfairly set up. "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 13, 2008 1:30 PM:

" As far as everyone with a weight problem having excuses well some do have just that then others have medical conditions that make it very hard to lose and until you ever have to walk in that person shoes you dont truelly know what it means...great to be judged by weight...funny how I know someone who weighs over 200lbs and is the healthiest person you can know...they walk daily watch what they eat work out 3-4 times a week and still she cant get below 200...why because she is 5'9 and large boned and has a thyroid problem...but she is also the friendliest and prettiest person I have met...beautiful on the inside and outsite...to bad they dont rate people by the way they act... "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 13, 2008 1:27 PM:

" I can say I am truelly sick myself of hearing from the parents of the ones who have to pay child support saying its not fair they have to pay so much. But yet they are the ones who dont have to find a sitter, pay electric, put a roof over the head of that child, put clothes on that child, buy the school supplies, go to the doctors office with them...maybe they pay child support but in most cases its not equal payment by any means as the parent with the child has way more costs...Maybe if they did pay their part then we wouldnt need a welfare system. "

douglas12 wrote on Apr 13, 2008 10:28 AM:

" Next about support, she makes 60k on her own and between her and her husband make 95k. I am by myself and we do have almost even time with our child and have to both pay everything equal. However she gets all the tax claims. The judge put my income around 33k a year unfairly based on I am self imployed and his words were that I am dressed nice, clean, and drive a nice car so i was lying on my tax returns of much less than 33k. Even with me at 33k and her at 60k/95k and everything equal between us, it comes up with me having to pay significant amount of support. No joint bothers me much more. "

douglas12 wrote on Apr 13, 2008 10:22 AM:

" hasher 28, I think it is great to hear someone else with the same basic midset I have towards people and their excuses about weight. I am a big believer that health should be measured by BF% and not weight. People got to stop making excuses for why they are unhealthy. About non-custodial parent paying, we have a form 14 calculator that is suppose to make things fair, hmmmm, if you can get the judge to follow it. I was just in court and was in a situation in which the judge first did not award joint on account he said the mother won't get along enough for it and awarded her sole because of that. "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 12, 2008 5:43 PM:

" hasher28 im someone who is overweight due to a hypothyroid im sure you dont understand it as im sure you are probably the most healthy person out there...I was the size 0 weighing in at 115lbs that you want everyone to be...and medical issues...lets see i have a broken ankle and fibula bone now that has medal to hold it together Im not allowed to do alot of the exercise you would think should be allowed...I do exercise and guess what Im probably eatting healthier than you...one thing I learned long ago what someone else thinks a person should look like or a size they should be isnt what they should be...as many are seeing prejudices come in all forms "

ndnlvngcherokee wrote on Apr 12, 2008 5:38 PM:

" oh wow where to begin with this one...first off yes some on welfare sit around doing nothing...others that are getting it are infact going to college and working trying to raise families...sometimes that extra help with daycare and medical helps...and just so everyone realizes not all jobs even full time offer benefits in this area...some people even state employees are working full time and they make under the wage needed for welfare...so you cant say its just someone sitting on their butts not doing anything. Also lets look at the way that if a person on welfare starts to finally get child support then state aide is taken away and they take the child support to pay for the welfare used...who does that help? "

mariab wrote on Apr 11, 2008 11:02 PM:

" What company was that, hasher? "

hasher28 wrote on Apr 11, 2008 6:01 PM:

" hmarie775, just brainstorming. A company I worked for instituted a weight to height standards program. Everyone had time to meet standards. Some received medical waivers. Morale and work production increased. Management had standards in many areas and either you met them or you were gone. Nothing unconstitutional about it, you were not required to work there. Designing, trouble shooting and implementing a program to get welfare recipients to earn thier money would be considerably more difficult. A blueprint could be the civilian conservation corps. Again, just brainstorming. Always looking for ways to reduce taxes and/or get more for the tax dollar. Some people are incapable of working and need the assistance. "

hmarie775 wrote on Apr 11, 2008 3:49 PM:

" Hasher, I understand your thinking sort of..but that would never work. How would you feel about private insurance companies enforcing something like that? All of us pay into insurance and those with more health problems drive the cost up..not limited to just overweight people. Again I've never met an overweight person who was okay with being overweight. A lot of people on medicaid are disabled and unable to excercise or have medical conditions (thyroid) that cause weight gain. It would be a logistical nightmare to try to enforce something so unconstitutional. Where do you draw the line? People with cancer cost us more, should we cut them off too? "

go_fish wrote on Apr 11, 2008 1:06 PM:

" "Hasher said "Exceed the body fat allowed for your height and age and you lose your job." This might work in your communist vision for Missouri, but there's this little thing called CIVIL RIGHTS that will most certainly get in the way. You clearly have no clue about poverty, public assistance, or human rights. Perhaps China is the place you outta be. "

hasher28 wrote on Apr 11, 2008 12:37 PM:

" hmarie775 wrote on Apr 11, 2008 9:16 AM:
" And Hasher...body fat limits...seriously??? "

Yes. If overweight people were to lose the excess weight they would probably have fewer medical problems. Which will result in lower premiums they pay. With fewer health problems less tax money will be needed to subsidize the insurance programs. Additionally, a healthier work force will result in fewer long term health problems, fewer sick days, fewer days off for medical appointments. The long term result is less tax money spent. I'm sure my thinking seems draconian but it is a step to improve people's quality of life and reduce taxes. Set the standard and allow folks time to meet them. "

hmarie775 wrote on Apr 11, 2008 9:18 AM:

" One more thing...most programs such as Food Stamps and TA do have work requirement guidelines and programs set up to send individuals to Dept. of Workforce Development and are REQUIRED to participate in a job search unless they are physically or mentally disabled. I like how the writer of this letter talks about choices. Not many people I know would CHOOSE to live in poverty, most are victims of either circumstance, addiction, or in a cycle of poverty. "

hmarie775 wrote on Apr 11, 2008 9:16 AM:

" And Hasher...body fat limits...seriously??? "

hmarie775 wrote on Apr 11, 2008 9:15 AM:

" programs that help these people to become educated and able to land WELL PAYING jobs in order to pay for day care and provide for their children. Or how about we teach real sex-ed, not abstinence only, and make birth control more readily available to prevent all these "baby mommas" in the first place! People who have never known poverty always think there is a simple solution..get a job...if only it were that easy! "

hmarie775 wrote on Apr 11, 2008 9:13 AM:

" Uninformed is right..

You cannot get BOTH child support and a Temporary Assistance (TANF) check from the state. You get one or the other. If a child support order is actually being paid and it exceeds the TA grant amount, the state cuts of the TA grant and sends the child support. If the child support is less, than the state takes the child support to reimburse themselves for the TA given. A single mom of three only qualifies for $286 a month in TA benefits anyway, YOU try supporting 3 kids and yourself off that. It's not really a way of life, these people are still struggling to makes ends meet and face challenges. We need "

TheRickster wrote on Apr 11, 2008 7:52 AM:

" The uninformed once again know it all. Go visit and maybe even help at a Pathways or any kind mental health facility. Most people that do get disabilty are deserving but there are some that don't. I would like for people to have to pass blood or urine tests that would not allow them to consume; alcohol, drugs,and cigarettes.
Most people on government aid do not own a car. There is a difference in welfare and disability. Welfare mommies have a "baby-daddy" that free loads and works but lives for free in the housing. Some families have made it a lifestyle for each of their generation. "

geofra wrote on Apr 11, 2008 6:56 AM:

" Unfortunately, if you make too much money at a job you lose your benefits. Many single mothers can't work because they can't afford babysitters. Many don't have transportation to get to work. Either the system or their personal situation works against them. I believe in personal responsibility, but getting to that stage of "personal responsibility" is more complicated than just cutting them off. "

blkpag1 wrote on Apr 11, 2008 6:46 AM:

" "I'd like to see all levels of government set body fat limits. Exceed the body fat allowed for your height and age and you lose your job."

Brilliant! Why stop there? Maybe we should just execute anyone that makes a choice that our government deems unhealthy, un-intelligent, or against the status quo!

"

hasher28 wrote on Apr 10, 2008 8:10 PM:

" Have these folks work for they get -- grafitti removal, trash pickup, etc. I'd like to see all levels of government set body fat limits. Exceed the body fat allowed for your height and age and you lose your job. This would encourage a healthy lifestyle and fewer medical related costs. The person would get checked annually during their birth month.
"

To add your comments you must be registered and logged in

*Member ID:
*Password:

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

*Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
*E-mail Address:
*Year of Birth:
	(children under 13 cannot register)
*First Name:
*Last Name:
Company:
*Home Phone:
Business Phone:
*Address:
*City:
*State:
*Zip Code:

Return to: Opinion « | Home « | Top of Page ^

Sports Poll

Online Poll

Related Stories

-246

Local Headlines

Our Opinion
Other deaths also deserve attention

Our Opinion
People must take responsibility for choices

Our Opinion
Rampant crime must be halted

Our Opinion
Saddened by demise of Write On

Your Opinion
Bush's legacy will be worst president ever

Top Commented Stories (more)

Top Commented Stories (more)

Sports Headlines

Our Opinion
Other deaths also deserve attention

Our Opinion
People must take responsibility for choices

Our Opinion
Rampant crime must be halted

Our Opinion
Saddened by demise of Write On

Your Opinion
Bush's legacy will be worst president ever

All Contents Copyright © 2009 News Tribune Co. All rights reserved.
AP stories Copyright © 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Click for copyright details.
Comments or questions? Contact us.
Employees

Available Feeds
RSS	Political News
RSS	Press Releases
RSS	Local News
RSS	State News
RSS	Business
RSS	Sports
RSS	Entertainment
About RSS Feeds

Find out about our RSS feeds and what they are.

Copyright © 2009. All rights reserved.
Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.