Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

3 Bumps

If someone is receiving benefits from the government,

and those benefits are stopped, was something taken away from the person receiving the benefit?

I would say no. If someone were giving me $1,000 per month and then they stopped, they did not take anything from me by stopping because I had no "right" to the gift in the first place. But I know others feel differently. I'm curious to understand everyone's own logic and reasoning on this.

Edited to add: For discussion purposes, let's exclude social security as an example.

Edited again to fix a typo before someone assumes I'm ignorant based on the typo.  ;)


Asked by Mom2Just1Kiddo at 10:18 AM on Mar. 17, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 28 (36,632 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (42)
  • Sigh. It's so annoying when people try to use emotion and guilt with the "what about the disabled! what about the children!" Yes, the disabled and children might need help, but that doesn't change that what they are receiving is not a "right." It's charity. PA is simply government charity. Yes, it's morally correct to provide for those who are incapable of providing for themselves. But it's still charity. Charity does not imply that those receiving it should feel shame.

    Answer by SuperChicken at 10:44 AM on Mar. 17, 2011

  • myboysarefirst - of course you can be upset. That's completely understandable. But nobody took $400 in food away from you. You were given free food for a period of time. And now you are not being given free food. That is different than TAKING food you purchased with money you earned yourself.

    Answer by SuperChicken at 10:49 AM on Mar. 17, 2011

  • myboysare
    Can I ask you a question? Because with my brothers discusstion he said to me " Well, how can you blame the people?"
    And I kinda see that with your response too-
    Can a person such as yourself in your situation be blamed for getting upset? Can the people in WI be blamed for getting upset?
    When societies are well aware that long term entitlement programs eventually lead to this?
    Wouldn't a more optimistic and forward attitude to be, to just be grateful that you were able to receive anything at all?
    Were you ever at any point after the decision, grateful you received the benefit? Or did the anger remain?

    Answer by jewjewbee at 10:48 AM on Mar. 17, 2011

  • It depends on what "government benefits" you are receiving. If you are talking about food stamps, medicaid or things like that, I tend to agree. However, government benefits also include things like Social Security, which I do currently receive. I have worked for 47 years and put money into the system, so that is a different matter entirely. It is NOT a gift; I have worked hard for the monthly stipend.

    Answer by tngrandma at 10:21 AM on Mar. 17, 2011

  • Nope. If they lose their benefits, they aren't losing anything that they "earned".

    Answer by laird6372 at 10:20 AM on Mar. 17, 2011

  • I agree with you. There are way too many with a sense of entitlement. The only exception I see to this is Social Security. My mom gets social security and she worked from the time she was 16 to 70 and paid into the system for all those years so in that case I feel she DESERVES the benifit of Social Security.

    Answer by bcauseimthemom at 10:20 AM on Mar. 17, 2011

  • I spent about 90 minutes trying to explain this to my progressive brother yesterday. By 11 pm I think I effectively converted him to at least an Independent. It's a hard concept to understand when the person is the one receiving it for a long time and outside forces continually reinforce what they already believe or really want to believe.
    This is basically why the people got lunatic crazy up north in Ohio and Wi over the governor's new bills, they honestly felt as though something of " theirs" was being taken away.
    Oh, the reason why he was so upset over the whole Ohio deal, (?) is because as a Federal employee he was pissed the State employees had better benefits. He literally felt as he was being ripped off by State employees and as a Fed employee should have had BETTER benefits all along. Afterall, he's a model employee. ( lol )
    He didn't realize real people cough up his paycheck.

    Answer by jewjewbee at 10:24 AM on Mar. 17, 2011

  • No, nothing was taken away. They were given benefits. For something to be taken away, it would have to be something that person had actually earned or owned in first place.

    Answer by SuperChicken at 10:30 AM on Mar. 17, 2011

  • OK are you meaning that all these alcoholics and druggies that get SS, food stamps and medicaid just because the AMA says that they are diseases should not be receiving help? Because I know a lot of lazy people who draw help because they are too lazy to work.

    Answer by grammawjo at 10:32 AM on Mar. 17, 2011

  • No. I don't think so.

    My MIL was contributing $200/month towards my oldest's school tuition. In January, she stopped contributing. I didn't feel like she was taking anything away. We were grateful that she was contributing in the first place.

    Answer by mommy2aftan at 10:34 AM on Mar. 17, 2011