Lottery winner continues to collect food stamps...

[JohnnyD]

Are you kidding me with this crap?

“I thought that they would cut me off, but since they didn’t, I thought maybe it was okay because I’m not working,” the lottery winner who just purchased a new house and car told Local 4 in Detroit. The station even filmed her shamelessly purchasing goods.

When Local 4 asked if she felt she had a right to the money, Clayton responded, “I mean I kinda do.”

Lotter Winner | Food Stamps | Amanda Clayton | The Daily Caller

Oh yeah and she bought a house and new car.

So, she's on the government dole and us working Americans have to not only support ourselves but also pay for her to sit at home watching Jerry Springer and scratching off lotto tickets?

[Duke41]

awesome

[buckman]

She used the EBT card to buy the lottery ticket and she has 2 houses to support. Give the poor thing a break.
When the voters on the take outnumber the voters that work hard for a living we will be all screwed. I'm thinking 5 years from now will do it.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by buckman

She used the EBT card to buy the lottery ticket and she has 2 houses to support. Give the poor thing a break.
When the voters on the take outnumber the voters that work hard for a living we will be all screwed. I'm thinking 5 years from now will do it.

Already the case in Maine.
Welfare recipients outnumber taxpayers Don Surber

I've been saying for well over a year now that we will eventually face a situation like the one that happened in the UK - massive, drastic cuts in welfare spending, government "employees" (another form of welfare) and other social programs. There has to come a point of retraction.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

government "employees" (another form of welfare)

I'd like to congratulate the Welfare Recipients from Portsmouth Naval Shipyard for coming in ahead of schedule and under budget....way to do nothing and collect a paycheck...

USS San Francisco Leaves Dry Dock in Record Time
Release Date: 11/1/2011 9:03:00 PM 1 Comment

SAN DIEGO (NNS) -- USS San Francisco (SSN 711) left dry dock Arco (ARDM 5) at Naval Base Point Loma, Nov. 1.

The Los Angeles-class, fast-attack submarine pulled into dry dock June 30, for an extensive docking availability, the largest shipyard work period ever performed at Arco.

"This type of availability normally takes a little over nine months; however, team San Francisco, Arco, and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard got the submarine in and out of dry dock in four months - a record," said Lt. Cmdr. Mack Schmidt, Arco's commanding officer. "The Arco's officers and crew performed exceptionally well, ensuring all docking-related key events were completed early, with zero incidents or accidents."

The crew that made up this dry docking evolution included Sailors from both San Francisco and Arco, as well as personnel from Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.

"I have been in the Navy 20 years and I have never come out of a dry dock early," said Lt. Eric Underwood, supply officer of San Francisco. "It was a great concerted effort between San Francisco, Arco, and the shipyard. By coming out of dry dock early we saved the government more than a million dollars."

In addition to providing the routine docking support, dry dock Arco was also tasked with painting San Francisco's hull and executing intensive crane operations in support of the availability.

"Everything went really smoothly and everyone worked very fast and efficiently," said Electronics Technician 1st Class Alpha Ramadan, assigned to San Francisco. "We are just glad to be back in the water; that is where we belong."

San Francisco now plans to focus on crew certifications and qualifications and their upcoming inspections in preparation for their next deployment.

"Both the docking and undocking evolution were executed very professionally," said Schmidt. "I am extremely proud of each and every crew member."

[The Dad Fisherman]

These people just don't get it....this is just unacceptable.....amazing what can be done when you collect a paycheck for doing nothing.

Shipyard completes USS San Juan work early

KITTERY, Maine — The USS San Juan left Portsmouth Naval Shipyard on Saturday, returning to its home port in Groton, Conn., eight days ahead of schedule.

San Juan arrived at the local shipyard April 8, 2010, for an engineered overhaul. The project team and ship's crew worked "seamlessly" throughout the overhaul to overcome many challenges and complete the work early, said Public Affairs Officer Danna Eddy.

The project team's goal was to complete San Juan with Portsmouth quality and "put the shipyard in San Juan's rearview mirror," said project superintendent David Horne. That statement served as the project team's motto as they worked hard to successfully execute the project, he said. The ship was in dry dock until August and then more work was performed.

"We did some things differently on San Juan, and it paid off," Horne said. "We made more progress in her availability prior to undocking than any engineered overhaul the shipyard has performed in the past. Thanks to that tremendous effort and execution excellence by the shipyard and crew, San Juan is ready to perform her fleet mission for the Navy more than a week ahead of schedule."

Shipyard commander Capt. Bryant Fuller said the demand for the submarines to be in operation is substantial.

"Thanks to the team effort put forth by San Juan's crew and the skilled craftsmen and women of the shipyard, we have successfully returned eight days of operational time to the fleet — that cannot be overstated," he said.

Cmdr. Ollie Lewis, San Juan's commanding officer, said he was thrilled with the performance of the shipyard and San Juan's crew. "It's wonderful to be back in Groton after successfully completing our maintenance overhaul early," he said. "(This) is a tribute to the dedication of both Portsmouth Naval Shipyard and the USS San Juan crew."

The on-time completion of submarine repairs and upgrades is critical in the maintenance of today's fleet and is essential to supporting the Navy's maritime strategy, Eddy said.

[scottw]

I noticed that JD put "employees" in quotes...doubt that he was referring to everyone working for government and your example is...I'm just guessing...the exception rather than the rule???

"I have been in the Navy 20 years and I have never come out of a dry dock early," said Lt. Eric Underwood

it will be great if it is a new trend

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I'd like to congratulate the Welfare Recipients from Portsmouth Naval Shipyard for coming in ahead of schedule and under budget....way to do nothing and collect a paycheck...

Exceptions do not make the rule. I'd be for every government employee that's effective and efficient, there are 5 others that sit around and do absolutely nothing. With all due respect to our soldiers that risk their lives, the US military is anything but financially efficient.

While in Vegas last month, I saw someone win $120k on a slot machine. Does that mean any of the talk about people losing money in Vegas is false and we should all run out there, play the slots and we'll all leave with riches?

[The Dad Fisherman]

Thats 2 examples....not one....2 different subs.

I have worked on projects w/ 4 different shipyards, Portsmouth, Puget Sound, Norfolk and Pearl Harbor

They all come to work every day, they all care about making their respective shipyards better, and I don't consider any of them "Welfare" recipients.

Are there some slugs around, yep....and THEY are the exception...not the rule.

there are also slugs in the private sector as well......and I've seen some of them sticking around for what seemed an eternity too.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I'd like to congratulate the Welfare Recipients from Portsmouth Naval Shipyard for coming in ahead of schedule and under budget....way to do nothing and collect a paycheck...

[."

TDF, I'm going to go out on a limb and speculate (confidently) that Johnny wasn't talking about all government employees, rather those that have a work ethic that, shall we say, would leave something to be desired. We all know that the public sector attracts those types of people, as they can't justify their salary in the private sector.

Johnny, I agree with you 100%. Just like what's happening in Europe, there will come a point in this country when people finally realize how much money we're bleeding on these programs, and when the checks start bouncing, the necessary cuts will be made. I expect the reaction here will be similar to the reaction in Europe - riots.

That's why I'm working as hard as I can to pay all my txes NOW, because I have to believe tax rates will skyrocket in the future.

10,000 baby boomers a day turn 65, and that'll be the average for the next 20 years. 10,000 a day. We don't have enough money to give them the social security benefits they expect, and for damn sure we don't have nearly enough money to give them the Medicare benefits they are expecting. At some point, the effect of the Baby Boomers will be the straw that broke the camel's back, there's no stopping it.

And you have to hand it to liberals to design a welfare program where winning one million dollars in the lottery, doesn't make you ineligible for food stamps. Kudos, liberals. Kudos to you all. Well done. I say to thee, yeah!

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

They all come to work every day, they all care about making their respective shipyards better, and I don't consider any of them "Welfare" recipients.

Are there some slugs around, yep....and THEY are the exception...not the rule.

Agreed.
I work with a number of state and federal agencies. It is absolutely the exception. I would have a hard time finding the 80% who 'sit around and do nothing'.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Exceptions do not make the rule. I'd be for every government employee that's effective and efficient, there are 5 others that sit around and do absolutely nothing. With all due respect to our soldiers that risk their lives, the US military is anything but financially efficient.

Financially efficient has to do with the budgeting processes...and I will be the first one to agree that it is hosed up....mega hosed up

that doesn't mean that the majority of people are sitting around doing nothing and collecting a paycheck.

your statement wasn't that the government wasn't financially efficient...your statement was that government employees are another form of welfare....

and you are also off on your "Bet"....I wouldn't say it is a 1 to 5 ratio.

I'd give you a 10 to 1 ratio....for every 10 employees that work...there's one slug...I work with one, guys friggin useless...but the other 7 people I work with come in, on time, and work a full day for a full day's pay

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Thats 2 examples....not one....2 different subs.

I have worked on projects w/ 4 different shipyards, Portsmouth, Puget Sound, Norfolk and Pearl Harbor

TDF if you don't think that there are a higher percentage of sloths in the public sector than in the private sector, that's your right to believe. But your 2 examples don't disprove what Johnny is saying, there are always exceptions.

In my opinion, many people go into the public sector precisely becaus ethey don't want to have to struggle to keep their jobs, like most folks have to do in the private sector. Obvious exceptios for military.

Remember that poor school district in Rhode Island (can't remember the name of the town) where the mayor at one point fired all the teachers? The school was clearly failing, the administrators asked the teachers to give up one lunch period a week to work with at-risk kids, and the teachers refused to do it unless they were compensated.

In my hometown (West Haven, CT), the principal of a middle school asked teachers to look into the hallway during the 5 minute break between periods, because there had been fights. When the union heard of this, they sent letters to the teachers telling them to refuse, because their contract did not include compensation for work done between classes.

That's precisely how I view public unionized labor. And that ethic (or lack thereof) doesn't fly in the real world. It just doesn't.

No generalization applies 100% of the time. But I'm comfortable saying that people work much, much harder in the private sector. Not counting my time in the USMC...

[The Dad Fisherman]

You're talking city/town employees and I'm talking Federal Employees....those are 2 different things as well.

In my town I'm very happy with the School teachers and school system. I have teachers that give extra of their own time to the students.....I even had the music teacher sign up as a merit badge counselor to work with the boys in the troops in town.....no union issues, no additional pay....he was happy to do it.

I was in the Public sector for 25 years...and I don't see much difference....there are your hard workers and there is the occasional slug.

There are over 25,000 cities and towns in the US...you list 2 and that is supposed to be the rule....but my 2 examples are the exception

Did anybody ever think that what they are seeing might be the exception?

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I'd give you a 10 to 1 ratio....for every 10 employees that work...there's one slug...I work with one, guys friggin useless...but the other 7 people I work with come in, on time, and work a full day for a full day's pay

What does he do,surf fishing websites all day? How is the glass house today?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

You're talking city/town employees and I'm talking Federal Employees....those are 2 different things as well.

True enough...

TDF, let's break down the public/private sector to its fundamental, irrefutable difference...

In the private sector (for the most part), you only bring in revenue by making people WANT TO give you their money. That's a heck of a thing. People work hard for their money, and will likely only hand it over for something of value. Furthermore, most businesses have a lot of competition. Consequently, common sense suggests that the private scetor workers have every imaginable incentive to be as efficient as possible, and to add as much value as possible. for their customers.

In the public sector, for the most part, the revenue is confiscated from the customer in the form of taxes, and given to the entity in question (Dept of Energy, Dept Of Education, whatever). These organizations know that they will get their budgeted revenue regardless of how well or poorly they perform. Furthermore, there is no competition. For example, there's only one Department Of Energy, there isn't a private-sector counterpart competing for those tax dollars. Those organizations have a monopoly, no competition (for many of the organizations, not for all). That removes much of the incentive to excel for many people.

Are there public sector workers who go above and beyond the call? Absolutely. Are there private scetor workers who are lazy? Absolutely. But between public and private, one of those sectors tells its employees that they don't get anything unless they work for it, the other tells its employees that the revenue is guaranteed up front. You don't need to be a Harvard-trained psychiatrist to guess which kinds of behaviors each system is likely to produce.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

your statement wasn't that the government wasn't financially efficient...your statement was that government employees are another form of welfare....

and you are also off on your "Bet"....I wouldn't say it is a 1 to 5 ratio.

I'd give you a 10 to 1 ratio....for every 10 employees that work...there's one slug...I work with one, guys friggin useless...but the other 7 people I work with come in, on time, and work a full day for a full day's pay

I can only account for personal experience and the experiences I'm told about by close friends. The reason I say 1 to 5 is because there are examples of uselessness throughout every government agency. 80% is certainly an exaggerated number but I'd seriously wager that in many government jobs at least 25% of those employed are useless.

For 4 years I volunteered as an assistant director of a high school after school program. I was at the school 3-4 days/week for 4 months per year. The 4-5 janitors sat in the back closet all day and watched tv or played cards, the 3 groundsmen hung out in the field shed watching tv or sleeping during the winter, a large portion of the teachers didn't give a damn about anything and 5-7 secretaries in the office that grumble all day. Just from what I saw for 4 years, a school that was $2million over budget could have eliminated at least 5 or 6 shlubs and would have saved close to $500k/year.

My current work has me contracting with schools, towns and the state quite regularly. One day I'm working at a school, the next day I'm working in the Capitol Building and the next day I'm at the Moakley Federal Courthouse. I probably work directly with 20-30 gov't employees per year and encounter hundreds over the course of my contracted work.

I'd say a minimum of 1 out of every 3 people I encounter are there just so that they don't have to be off doing something else or have nothing at all to do - 3 security guards to monitor 1 loading dock, an extra electrician whose job is solely to "make sure the lights are turned on", not to mention it takes a 1 hour onsite meeting with 4 people to decide which direction tables and chairs should face.

Just like with all generalizations, there will be exceptions. You seem to work in an area that is efficient and effective. You and the people that you work with should be commended, because that is not the norm.

And I'm not just talking about your labor-oriented positions. There's even more waste and uselessness when you start talking about government employees that wear a suit to work.

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Agreed.
I work with a number of state and federal agencies. It is absolutely the exception. I would have a hard time finding the 80% who 'sit around and do nothing'.

as a career student, how would you have anything to compare it to.

[The Dad Fisherman]

I agree with that...thats not what I'm arguing.

I'm saying that a lot of government workers do work....they don't all sit around collecting a check, which is what was alluded to earlier.

Like I said...I was in the Private sector for 25 years...i do get the differences

I have also seen a lot of government waste, but I see the cause of it more in the processes than in the people.

The processes drive me ape-chit....I will never argue that.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

True enough...

TDF, let's break down the public/private sector to its fundamental, irrefutable difference...

In the private sector (for the most part), you only bring in revenue by making people WANT TO give you their money. That's a heck of a thing. People work hard for their money, and will likely only hand it over for something of value. Furthermore, most businesses have a lot of competition. Consequently, common sense suggests that the private scetor workers have every imaginable incentive to be as efficient as possible, and to add as much value as possible. for their customers.

In the public sector, for the most part, the revenue is confiscated from the customer in the form of taxes, and given to the entity in question (Dept of Energy, Dept Of Education, whatever). These organizations know that they will get their budgeted revenue regardless of how well or poorly they perform. Furthermore, there is no competition. For example, there's only one Department Of Energy, there isn't a private-sector counterpart competing for those tax dollars. Those organizations have a monopoly, no competition (for many of the organizations, not for all). That removes much of the incentive to excel for many people.

Are there public sector workers who go above and beyond the call? Absolutely. Are there private scetor workers who are lazy? Absolutely. But between public and private, one of those sectors tells its employees that they don't get anything unless they work for it, the other tells its employees that the revenue is guaranteed up front. You don't need to be a Harvard-trained psychiatrist to guess which kinds of behaviors each system is likely to produce.

[justplugit]

She is just the tip of the iceberg.
Watch Judge Judy for a week and you will see every conceivable way possibvle
of people ripping off the welfare system
Oh my back is a little stiff this morning, where do I sign up for disability?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by justplugit

She is just the tip of the iceberg.
Watch Judge Judy for a week and you will see every conceivable way possibvle
of people ripping off the welfare system
Oh my back is a little stiff this morning, where do I sign up for disability?

Insurance companies are smart. They hire Private Investigators to knock people off for claiming disability insurance yet being perfectly fine. The government needs to get with the program.

My fiance is a PA and she sees people every week (maybe everyday for all I know) that are on Medicare due to a disability. Okay, crap happens and people get injured or something similar? No, things like being 28 years old and having "anxiety" are now acceptable ways to claim disability. ANXIETY.... Are you effing kidding me?!?

20-30 years ago if someone tried to claim "anxiety" as a disability, you know what society would tell them?? "Welcome to the real world. Suck it up and get a job!" But now in the kooshy world where everything must be rainbows and butterflies, we coddle these wastes of space and society tells them "don't worry. It's not your fault."

[mosholu]

Back to the article maybe I read it wrong but how do you qualify for welfare if you own two houses. I would thing as a precondition for getting welfare one of those houses should have been sold or rented.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by mosholu

Back to the article maybe I read it wrong but how do you qualify for welfare if you own two houses. I would thing as a precondition for getting welfare one of those houses should have been sold or rented.

She used her winning to buy a second house... and a new car. But you know, she has bills to pay so the government shouldn't stop giving her food stamps.

Orrrr..... instead of taking the lump sum, she could have taken the yearly payout. Then, since she'd have income equivalent to a healthy yearly salary without actually having to work, she could go to school and get an education. That way, when the lotto payouts stop, she can actually get a job and be a contributing member of society.

But, that's far too rational and responsible of thinking for someone that just won $1million and thinks they should continue to receive their handouts.

It's disgusting.

[RIJIMMY]

I think its an honest mistake you guys should give the poor girl a break.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by mosholu

Back to the article maybe I read it wrong but how do you qualify for welfare if you own two houses. I would thing as a precondition for getting welfare one of those houses should have been sold or rented.

It's basedon employment income, or lack thereof. She is unemployed, so she reports no income, so she's eligible. Insane but true.

[Raven]

they yanked it

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Okay, crap happens and people get injured or something similar? No, things like being 28 years old and having "anxiety" are now acceptable ways to claim disability. ANXIETY.... Are you effing kidding me?!?

Yup, it's the truth, anxiety qualifies as a disability.
How easy is that to fake, just drink 5 cans of RedBull before you apply.
Either you'll get the disability or your wife will get a death benefit.

[Raider Ronnie]

Bet she can't wait to vote for Obama again in november !

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Are you kidding me with this crap?


Lotter Winner | Food Stamps | Amanda Clayton | The Daily Caller

Oh yeah and she bought a house and new car.

So, she's on the government dole and us working Americans have to not only support ourselves but also pay for her to sit at home watching Jerry Springer and scratching off lotto tickets?

Johnny, you don't usually miss the point, but you did this time. SHE BOUGHT THE FRIGGIN LOTTERY TICKET WITH OUR FRIEKIN MONEY IN THE FIRST PLACE. WE SHOULD BE SPLITTING UP THE POT WITH HER.

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

Johnny, you don't usually miss the point, but you did this time. SHE BOUGHT THE FRIGGIN LOTTERY TICKET WITH OUR FRIEKIN MONEY IN THE FIRST PLACE. WE SHOULD BE SPLITTING UP THE POT WITH HER.

I mean I kinda do