NPAT Test: Welfare and Poverty

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Angus. Why do you try to seriously debate Opebo?

[angus]

ah, opebo's fun.  frustrating, but fun.  he has a good heart.  you wouldn't know it, because he's spoiled.  and confused.  and bigoted.  I think he comes here for the same reason I do:  free therapy.  And frankly, I can relate.  First, we're close to the same age.  I was born in '67.  He in about '68 I think.  I was raised by Democrats.  Pro-socialized medicine, anti-capital punishment, anti-Vietnam war, pro-union Democrats.  I was raised to think Nixon--and Reagan for that matter--were dirty words.  It took me till I was well past thirty to realize that, although my parents were decent and meant well, they pretty much brainwashed me.  And like most brainwashed people, I thought those who didn't agree with my mama and daddy were fuçked in the head, somehow.  Either they were confused, stupid, or just had no one ever explain things correctly to them.  Then--and it wasn't like an epiphany, but rather slowly and gradually--I started paying attention.  I realized that the Democrats were just as sleazy as the Republicans.  Perhaps moreso, because ostensibly they were the moralists, whereas the Republicans were largely individualists and traditionalists, and therefore could know no better.  So I started holding them to higher standards, eventually coming to despise them.  Well, then, long story short, I came full circle, now I recognize that they're both pretty screwed up, and I try not to ally with either, except at this time of year, every four years, when it becomes necessary.  And if you replace all instances of Democrat with Republican, all instances of Mama and Daddy with Mother and Father, and all instances of "anti-capital punishment, anti-vietnam war" with "pro-security, pro-capitalist" you'd pretty much have Opebo's story.  So I think us kindered spirits, after a fashion (except that he calls his conversion an "epiphany" whereas I call it maturation.)  So anyway, I sort of enjoy his company.  And his insight.

[Frodo]

Angus,

Should I infer from your avatar that you are actually a Republican, and that you live in Iowa? 

You always struck me as an more of an independent and (judging from your posts in the past) that you live somewhere in Mississippi. 

[opebo]

...Although I have never been on welfare, I do know at least one guy who was on welfare for about a year.  I remember him having an apartment that was no worse than mine at the time.  Pool, jacuzzi, new carpet.  He didn't have an in-unit washer or dryer, but then neither did I at the time.  That was about 12 years ago.  But he only had to walk about 20 meters to the laundry room.  And he ate reasonably well.  And his car, though old and ugly, ran well.  And he had enough clothes to wear and still managed to come up with alimony and child support money to give to his ex-wife every month.  His biggest problem with the welfare was the emotional damage to his psyche.  We used to talk about this.  He admitted to me that he felt some shame about accepting it.  He went through periods when he wouldn't open the door when people came over.   Pretend to be away.  Eventually it got to him and he went out and got a job and quit the welfare.  His job only paid slightly better than the welfare, but I could tell it made a huge difference for him.  He seemed more content.  Happier.  Seriously, I knew this guy well and consider him a close personal friend, and it was clear to me that the welfare wasn't good for him.  and as a friend, I'm glad he went back to work.  But, it was sufficient in terms of the amount needed for him to live, independently, in a small but fairly well-appointed apartment.

No, single males are not eligable for any welfare, ever.

Well, I suppose that 12 years ago makes your tale just prior to the 'reform' of 1996.  Nowadays your friend would have to starve.  In fact the only eligability of the single male without children is 3 months of foodstamps in his lifetime.  That's about 150/month.  That's what his citizenship is worth - 3 X $150 = $450.   Or the one remaining exception would be if your friend were seriously and permanently 'disabled'..  but I don't think he was.  Besides, even for those eligable, such as the horribly disabled or mothers with children, the amount is a mere few hundred dollars a month, angus.  Not enough to maintain the sort of lifestyle you described.  You friend was probably just on unemployment, possibly plus food stamps, in the pre-1996 world.

[David S]

Time for the ignore button again.

[opebo]

ah, opebo's fun.  frustrating, but fun.  he has a good heart.  you wouldn't know it, because he's spoiled.  and confused.  and bigoted.

Thanks, but I'm not confused.   

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We are, though I always think of you as a baby-boomer. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Haha, I suppose we are rather mirror images.  I call it an 'epiphany' because it was like a fog lifting - seeing the same world in a totally opposite fashion.  The interesting thing about 'americanism' (and by that I mean mainly a sort of classical-liberal culture) is that it  precludes seeing what the other fellow is talking about - the power behind all the surface occurences.  Maturation might be a slow and grudging acceptance of the miserable status quo, but an epiphany implies a sudden realization that you had previously been blinded.

[angus]

Should I infer from your avatar that you are actually a Republican, and that you live in Iowa?

You may infer what you wish.

but yeah, I am a republican and I live in Iowa.