Angel Adams, 37 yrs old with 15 kids and complaining about lack of gov't assistance

[El Kabong]

What groups do you belong too and why do it?

I belong to the Masons and the Shriners. I do it because my grandmother was a patient at a Shriner's hospital in the 1930's and without their help she wouldn't have had the chance at a normal life, my Dad and Uncle wouldn't be here, and neither my older brother nor myself would be here. I do it because I am grateful for the opportunity at life I have been given and wish to pay it forward to others and I do it because it is altruistic, it is good, and I'm not actually the asshole most assume me to be.

The Masons (in my state, but also in others) support a Children's Home which used to be an orphanage (due to the Civil War and Great Depression). The Children's Home sends the kids to school, provides food, shelter, loving House Parents, and also provides funds for those kids who wish to go to college. The Mason's also support a retirement center to provide for the elderly who may not have the means or family to support them. There are other side projects we pick up as well, but those are the main charities.

The Shrine has hospitals worldwide, they provide FREE surgeries for various orthopedic ailments, cleft lip, cleft palate, burns, etc. They have the world's very best doctors and they will accept and treat any child. And it makes a hell of a difference.

[walrus]

It's sad. I worked for several years in the Human Service field. Some of these women look at having kids as a way to get more Government funding. I would hear clients talking about this as I was working in the field. Don't get me wrong, there were many cases of people who just fell on hard times and were doing all they could to put things back together but more than a few were making a way of life out of the system. The pros tend to now the system better than many of us who worked in the field. It gets sad when the parents main concern is getting as much as they can not for the kids, but for themselves. It sucks that a system set up to help the kids can be twisted against them by selfish parents. I can say it was a relatively small percentage of the case loads I had.

[Gandalf]

No, having a kid doesnt automatically make you an idiot. Having fifteen and no means to support them yes, that makes you an idiot.

Yes, it is a significantly different thing.

I disagree with Lyle's notion that charity can solve all of societies ills. Those that create inequality and poverty, have largely gained from perpetuating such a system. It is only right that tax is redistributed and that alone should be sufficient enough to reduce social inequality. That doesn't mean paying for every Mum and her dozen kids though, there needs to be sufficient checks and balances. If you are on welfare and get pregnant again for instance, then you should automatically be denied extra benefits.

I look at the society here and there is no such thing as the welfare Mum. It simply wouldn't be accepted and thus nobody allows it to happen. By being more hardline, you can stamp out blatant abuse. However, I think what we have here is perhaps too extreme. It really comes down to a sense of balance and proportion.

If the ordinary person wants a child then they should have one, but make sure they can provide for them first. If you've paid your taxes year in year out and things go wrong, then you deserve support too. You shouldn't need charities to bail you out as Lyle seems to think, your own contributions should suffice and people in the UK in particular tend to pay more than their share in taxes.

[VictorCharlie]

America's welfare state has created a sense of victimhood in poor communities. Politicians have garnered minority votes by pandering to them with government assistance for decades. These programs have perpetuated the poverty cycle thus creating more and more demand for government assistance. Politicians have essentially hooked poor communities on government assistance like a drug. The federal government should have no role in welfare programs. At a max this should be done at the state level and truthfully even more local than that. Let local communities decide how they support those in need an more importantly how they want to fund that support. Penn Jillette has a great quote on this.

"It's amazing to me how many people think that voting to have the government give poor people money is compassion. Helping poor and suffering people is compassion. Voting for our government to use guns to give money to help poor and suffering people is immoral self-righteous bullying laziness.

People need to be fed, medicated, educated, clothed, and sheltered, and if we're compassionate we'll help them, but you get no moral credit for forcing other people to do what you think is right. There is great joy in helping people, but no joy in doing it at gunpoint."

Good video that illustrates this.


Humans are capable of so much but a lot of us will continually do just enough. America needs to raise the bar for what we expect of our citizens and then hold them accountable. This is absurd


Miles min. wage is the biggest discriminator against young and unskilled labor. It is amazing that politicians get poor people to vote against their own best interests. The best thing we could do for young and unskilled labor is to abolish the the minimum wage.


Our system for service jobs provides an opportunity for the worker to make more money than they could at a normal wage/hr job, it provides the customer w/a cheaper product and better service and the employer with a lower overhead and thus ability to hire more people. I ran a bar & grill. My waitresses were mostly young college girls w/ busy schedules. They usually worked three nights a week for 5-8 hours and walked out with $150 on average a night. If they actually worked 24 hours in a week that is almost $19/hr. No restaurant could afford to pay a full wait staff and bar staff that wage w/o 1. dramatically raising prices 2. cutting staff 3. forcing out young workers who are looking for a decent job with flexible and low hours. Not to mention being a tip based salary creates a great incentive for the worker to give you the best possible service and if you think it was substandard you can simply not tip.

[Gandalf]

VC, I simply cannot understand where you are coming from with some of your views. The abolishment of the minimum wage, for instance, is not going to help anyone bar those who want to abuse workers who are seen as a factor of production. In fact, I see no reason to even discuss such positions as I find them to be little more than reproduction of Chicago school points of views, which rational people have long seen as being scams which make the business community happy.

In America you have waiters earning 2 dollars 15 an hour as a basic wage, you have a minimum wage of something around 7 dollars an hour. Do you know how little that is? Why should you rely on the customer to tip? Why should you be earning a minimum wage half that of the UK? It is pure corporate greed and it doesn't take much for McDonald's to simply clean its act up and pay a fair wage. The catering industry is an exploitation industry and likewise, should be cleaned up. Let them go out of business. If you cannot pay the worker a wage without relying on my charity, then you deserve to go broke. You shouldn't have a business. You are a failed business.

In terms of a welfare state, I am quite in the middle. I have been in employment since the age of 14, I know the value of work and have always been in work. My first working wage almost 2 decades ago was more than double what an American waitress will recieve as a basic payment minus tips. I believe in the value of labour. That means paying the worker to do a job. It means closing your borders and it means paying the person who cleans your toilet a fair wage. He deserves it, and so do you, and so do I. Only open the borders for skilled jobs that local people just cannot do.

In the West, I think people have on the whole been sold out. My friend was talking about whenever he goes home to Scotland the taxi drivers are all Polish. There is a reason for that, it is because unchecked access to a labour market increases competition and drives down wages. I would quite like to be a taxi driver, but why would you do it for peanuts, just to make the owners happy? The dilution of markets is a problem and the lack of a meaningful minimum wage is a huge factor.

I don't think British people have any particular aversion to working for Scotish taxi firms. However, if wages are lower it would make a lot more sense to overseas workers who will happily work for less. I think it all leads to a serious problem. You could just blame the poor natives who will never do a days work, but at the same time, I think American and British societies have been seriously harmed by the policies set from above. They have clearly failed and I would like the opposite of much of what you argue.

People don't ask to be outsourced, they don't ask for borders to be unchecked, on the whole I don't think it is fair to blame most people who are struggling. I think Britain and America have been sold a Friedman based lie and the latest from Britain is that under 25's should not recieve benefits and that the mail service be privatised. I think the country has been sold out and viewpoints like yours are a problem.

[TitoFan]

By all means this woman should receive government assistance.

The government should assist her in relocating these kids to the homes of unfortunate, caring couples who cannot have children of their own... but are perfectly capable of raising some. It's a "win-win-win" situation. The kids win by getting a fair shake in life, being raised with the proper love and attention. The new parents win by getting their lifelong wish of having children to raise and care for. And the "shit-for-brains" hamster...er... woman wins by getting a huge load and responsibility off her back. One that she can ill afford to perform correctly.

[VictorCharlie]

The abolishment of the minimum wage, for instance, is not going to help anyone bar those who want to abuse workers who are seen as a factor of production. In fact, I see no reason to even discuss such positions as I find them to be little more than reproduction of Chicago school points of views, which rational people have long seen as being scams which make the business community happy.

I wouldn't want to debate either if the side I'd taken was patently false. If you had ever run a business or managed a payroll then you'd be aware of this. Raising the minimum wage raises the floor for wages but not the ceiling and thus pushes people out of the job market. Of course in this case it is the young and unskilled that get pushed out so the reality is it hurts the exact same people it is supposed to help. This isn't debatable but rather verifiable fact. It is nothing more than a ploy by politicians. Looks like it worked.

In America you have waiters earning 2 dollars 15 an hour as a basic wage, you have a minimum wage of something around 7 dollars an hour.

You keep repeating the bolded part. As I stated when I ran a bar my employees averaged around $20/hr. Either you are being willfully ignorant which considering your usual miseducation on anything American is entirely possible or your are intentionally stating false information to help your own position. Regardless you should be ashamed. Minimum wage employees make up 6% of all US workers with over half of that group being part-time employees. It isn't meant to be the minimum amount for a person to live on nor do I care what it is in the UK or see how it is relevant. If it were about the minimum needed to make a living then it wouldn't be a national standard due to varying costs of living throughout the US. Which further makes my point it is nothing more than a political point used to dupe voters. If you are insistent on making the comparison, I'd suggest that the unemployment of young and unskilled in the UK is largely due to your high minimum wage.

Why should you rely on the customer to tip?

Because it is a superior system for all parties involved. I already explained why. If you'd ever worked in the US service industry then you'd realize that.

It is pure corporate greed and it doesn't take much for McDonald's to simply clean its act up and pay a fair wage.

A fair wage is exactly a fair compensation for one's labor. Flipping burgers isn't exactly a technical gig. the fact that just about any adult could do the task is indicative of the wage it commands.

If you cannot pay the worker a wage without relying on my charity

It isn't charity it is how much you feel the service was worth and a far better way to do business. You get superior service and a cheaper product, the employee gets to make a wage FAR superior than almost any hourly paid employment they could find and the employer gets a motivated employee, lower overhead and ability to hire more workers w/o raising prices. No one in the US is advocating changing this system and definitely not the service industry. You should probably mind your own business.

My first working wage almost 2 decades ago was more than double what an American waitress will recieve as a basic payment minus tips.

Yes but w/tips there are waitstaff and bartenders that probably make more than you do now. They wouldn't have it any other way.

viewpoints like yours are a problem.

Viewpoints like yours are ignorant and bigoted. Quit telling people how to run their own lives, how much of their own money they should keep and worry about your own.

[El Kabong]

VC, if miles didn't tell people how to live how would they get by

[Gandalf]

A minimum wage exists to provide a basic means to survive, or at least it should. It should be enough to cover your living costs and get by month to month. Obviously 7 US dollars does not provide that to any sufficient degree whence something like 50 million people needing food stamps. Now if there are effective controls on corporations in regards to outsourcing, unchecked immigration etc, then obviously there will still be jobs.

In regards to your abhorrent views on service industry workers, then I think you are quite repugnant. You shouldn't need to rely on the charity of a customer to top up 2.15 an hour. How about you just pay a fair wage of 20 dollars if that is what the worker will end up taking home. Instead, you are asking the worker to whore themselves to the highest paying bidder. It is sick when all you are doing at the end of the day is buying a drink.

The unemployment of young Britains today is akin to the problem in America. The minimum wage is not relevant, but what is relevent is outsourcing and unchecked immigration. I think these are serious problems and those alone will create unemployment for young natives and decrease the numbers of available jobs. I think already in the UK young workers are earning less than the minimum wage.

When it comes to dismissing people who flip burgers and clean toilets, I think you again display a pompous arrogance and disregard for important jobs. These things have to be done and in truth, not many want to do them. However, there is a demand for hygiene and certainly in your country a high demand for obesity. Again, what is the harm in paying the Mc'D's worker 18 bucks an hour? If they work hard and are helping to make the branch money then they deserve more than the bare minimum. That is where you don't value people, they are a mere commodity to be exploited. I disagree with that on political, moral, and ethical grounds.

I think you come across as someone who has been brainwashed into believing the Chicago school economics view of globalisation. Of course it has been great for the US elite, but for many Americans it means enhanced poverty and around the world it means the exploitation of labour markets. Personally, I am very much against that world view.

And yes, Lyle. Very insightful. What I encourage is that society should care more for it's home labour resources as eventually when the skeleton is stripped, the entire thing will come crashing down like a house of cards. The middle classes have been eroded for 40 years, 50 million are on food stamps, the end isn't going to be pretty. The Soviet Union collapsed after overextending itself, the US appears to be gradually getting there. The US is maybe not that far behind. I also encourage people not to take part in the consumer economy. Strip your life down to the essentials and plan well, because ultimately the pension and security you thought the state would provide might not be there. Certainly don't rely on the US dollar and make sure you know how to grow potatoes.

[Violent Demise]

Miles just to point out. No one complained about you saying having a child was something to plan and give serious thought to. It all went pear shaped when you said people with kids were idiots.

Box on.

I still think it is kind of true though. A time and a place for everything. Got a kid and not ready yet? Outof controll breeding is never good.

Sounds like something someone who not doesn't have any but can't have any kids would say

[Gandalf]

That is a silly argument, VD and nothing to do with my stance on the issue. Nobody should be having children if there is nothing to back them up. My views come from a general appraisal of society, experience, and knowing how those who grew up around me have done. It is irresponsible to raise children and not be able to support them.

For your information, my medical records show my sperm to be slightly lazy, but within a normal range. Obviously my sperm dictates my political and social views.

[VictorCharlie]

A minimum wage exists to provide a basic means to survive, or at least it should. It should be enough to cover your living costs and get by month to month. Obviously 7 US dollars does not provide that to any sufficient degree whence something like 50 million people needing food stamps. Now if there are effective controls on corporations in regards to outsourcing, unchecked immigration etc, then obviously there will still be jobs.

A min. wage exists to pander to people. It discriminates against unskilled workers and nothing more. See the 3rd video I posted for succinct look at the damage the minimum wage does.

In regards to your abhorrent views on service industry workers, then I think you are quite repugnant. You shouldn't need to rely on the charity of a customer to top up 2.15 an hour. How about you just pay a fair wage of 20 dollars if that is what the worker will end up taking home. Instead, you are asking the worker to whore themselves to the highest paying bidder. It is sick when all you are doing at the end of the day is buying a drink.

It isn't charity. It is a fair exchange for service rendered. I've already explained how this is a better system for the server, employer and customer. Everyone wins except ignorant whiny British expats that know nothing about how things work in a country he has never been in.

What is relevent is outsourcing and unchecked immigration.

What is good is freedom of movement and exchange of commerce, culture and goods regardless of borders. Only bigots like yourself think you can put up a wall and hide from those pesky foreigners.
Interesting article about open borders and peace

http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detai...#axzz2hjSmEKvm

When it comes to dismissing people who flip burgers and clean toilets, I think you again display a pompous arrogance and disregard for important jobs.

This is pretty rich considering how dismissive you are of my profession. That being said how/when was I dismissive of those professions? I said they didn't require a high level of skill. I dont' think that is really debatable.

Again, what is the harm in paying the Mc'D's worker 18 bucks an hour?

There isn't anything wrong with that if the employer believes the worker's labor is worth that much and vice/versa but that is an agreement for them to come to and none of your business. Why not just allow people to negotiate their own wages w/o gov't intrusion? I mean if we are going to have a minimum wage why not just make it $100 dollars an hour and we can all be rich.

That is where you don't value people, they are a mere commodity to be exploited. I disagree with that on political, moral, and ethical grounds.

I do value people, so much that I think what they decide to work for or pay their employees is their own decision but please get off your moral high horse. You are the same guy that was upset you got a slavic cabby and a Pakistani hotel clerk the last time you were home.

What I encourage is that society should care more for it's home labour resources as eventually when the skeleton is stripped, the entire thing will come crashing down like a house of cards. The middle classes have been eroded for 40 years, 50 million are on food stamps, the end isn't going to be pretty.

People should care more but what you encourage is the empowering of government to coerce people into giving up the fruits of their labor through a threat of violence to spend as you best see fit. Compassion for one's fellow man is an honorable thing but advocating for people to do it at gunpoint is not. See the video I posted about George. The narrator even has a very "British" accent and not foreign so you can relate.

[Spicoli]

A minimum wage is a introductory wage and should be looked at just a beginning, not a long term existence. If you choose to have and sustain a family you should be expected to increase that ability to provide beyond the bare essential. The Government...all of them...have created the welfare state and count on it, they nurture and encourage it and what they both have in common is the need for term limits!

[Gandalf]

No, I disagree with you on practically everything you say. We clearly have very different views on how society should reward people. People who do useful things in society should be rewarded for their efforts. Working hard is something everyone should aspire to and the motivation to do so is in being paid a fair wage. If that isn't happening then society is failing them. A soldier is paid by the government, perhaps cleaners should be too. Teaching and the military are hardly jobs for a man with a thing for small government. Maybe they should be paid 2 dollars an hour and the public can decide through charity what more to give them. I guess you would have more soldiers working in bars and less dead foreigners overseas.

I find your views on tipping to be mildly absurd and perhaps it is you that is ignorant of the norms of other countries. A minimal tip is perhaps expected in some places, however quite often there is a service charge and that should suffice and would of course be paid in the wages. Certainly here it would be regarded as an insult by many to be offered a tip. Being paid less than minimum wage and then be expected to be servile and creepy around people who just want a quiet drink is also an insult to the paying customer. Pay the worker and charge what you need to charge.

My views on immigration might seem backwards to someone like you or people who have this vision of a multi cultural utopia. However, it simply doesn't work. I live in a place where immigration is checked and consequently local people drive the taxis, work in hotels, pick the fruit etc etc. It seems to work. There is little societal unrest, there are no ghetto's full of white people, certainly no 'terrorists' which in the UK at least, seem to be angry people who failed to integrate. The system here is working. You invite skilled labour and only let them stay temporarily. This is how things work in most countries, labour is not unchecked and it should certainly never be so.

You have to respect what the society is and if there is change it should be gradual. The UK has allowed unchecked immigration for nearly 2 decades and the society seems to have become warped and it isn't the minimum wage to blame. The minumum wage has declined and still there are no jobs. I have seen both sides of the coin and see which one favours the local populace. It is better to control your country and protect your labour force.

Also, for sure I believe people who clean toilets are every bit as important as other jobs. The least society can do is provide them a living wage. I am not advocating communism, but certainly socialism so that there is a more level playing field. The current system frowns upon people who won't work and yet doesn't pay enough to do work. It's simply not good enough and in the case of your own country which has unbelievable levels of wealth disparity, I absolutely think you are playing a dangerous game. It's just untenable.

Actually, one thing I am getting sick of is you branding around words like bigot in every thread. Yes, I am very much opposed to your political and military system, but people are just people. Some of my favourite people are American, but they don't get defensive or nationalistic and accept the faults. 'Oh, but you are from overseas and cannot comment'. On the whole I try to stay clean with you when it would be all too easy to attack your contradictions which are all too obvious and yet in every post you are using inflammatory language. I expect it of someone like Lyle, but I thought we were on more neutral ground.

I see little reason to discuss things with you on that basis. Rather than respond to views that are clearly odd with an insult or 4 thrown in for good measure, I will not respond. And before Lyle jumps in by saying that I should be on 2 dollars an hour, I am paid for by the market too, which I am not against. I just don't believe massive wealth inequalities should be the norm. Students pay their tuition and sign up for my classes. If there was no demand, then I should rightly be on my heels. In fact I prefer the private teaching sector, as there are no safety nets and you either perform or else don't and deal with the consequences. That doesn't mean that the person cleaning toilets doesn't deserve a living wage though. He does his job well, and though not educated, he has a right to live. In Australia the McDonald's worker has a minimum wage of 16 dollars. I don't see their economy collapsing. They also control their immigration to a much more healthy degree. Again, Australia bucks the trend as dictated by the Chicago school, which only works in totalitarian regimes largely backed up by force.

[Beanflicker]

Understood, but originally welfare was for TEMPORARY help to get people back on their feet, to get them to a place where they could provide for their families. But now people live on it, they just accept the benefits of it without shame, without remorse, and they like this lady have the gall to demand MORE, not because they provide anything that benefits society but just simply because they ARE. The since of entitlement in the United States is at epidemic levels and it needs to be cut out like a cancer.

Couldn't agree more. I have a friend who's a social worker and she's confirmed this fact many times. Of course there are people using it the way it's supposed to work, ie a TEMPORARY safety net, but like with anything you have tons of people abusing it. She's seen everything, including women who have more kids because of the extra money they get, and of course people who claim welfare and say they live alone so they get more, when in reality they live with a boyfriend/girlfriend.

These people sicken me. I get attacked for saying that because as a middle class white guy, apparently I'm not allowed to criticize anybody who isn't also a middle class white guy. But the entitled attitudes and the complete lack of shame that these welfare abusers have makes me physically ill.