Re: It's Time to Stigmatize Some People Again

On 11 Nov 2025 02:08:00 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:

> On Nov 10, 2025 at 6:54:44 PM MST, "ALB" wrote
> <[email protected]>:
> 
>> On 10 Nov 2025 22:34:25 GMT, Brock McNuggets wrote:
>> 
>>> On Nov 10, 2025 at 3:07:40 PM MST, "pothead" wrote
>>> <[email protected]>:
>>> 
>>>> On 2025-11-10, useapen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> There it was this morning, plain as day. It was a screenshot of a woman
>>>>> going off about how her food stamps were cut off, the $1,000 per month she
>>>>> and her family supposedly get from the government, juxtaposed against her
>>>>> being called out by someone else for hair extensions, expensive trips to
>>>>> the nail salon, and tattoos. In short, she wastes money on unnecessary
>>>>> things and then demands money from the government to support herself.
>>>>> 
>>>>> She's squandering money on luxuries while relying on the taxpayers to fund
>>>>> her groceries for anywhere between four and seven people in her household.
>>>>> 
>>>>> And worse, there's no sense of shame among many of these people. There's
>>>>> no concept that maybe they should keep their heads down and just be
>>>>> thankful for what they've gotten.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Instead, many tried to brag about what all they'd do if they didn't get
>>>>> SNAP money. They threatened violence and got away with it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There used to be a stigma for being a welfare recipient, and while I get
>>>>> that it's not always fair to stigmatize people for temporary setbacks, too
>>>>> many people are still making a lifestyle based on government largesse.
>>>>> 
>>>>> These people are too comfortable doing so and are too demanding to be
>>>>> permitted to go about their lives unchallenged.
>>>>> 
>>>>> People who refuse to work, who maintain large households and exist off of
>>>>> taxpayer money, shouldn't be accepted. They shouldn't be tolerated. They
>>>>> should be demeaned and mocked as the leeches they are.
>>>>> 
>>>>> When I was younger, this happened. It was considered mean to do, but it at
>>>>> least meant those who got welfare in some form at least kept quiet about
>>>>> it. Many were made to feel a sense of shame about it, which often led them
>>>>> to take steps to get off of it and to pay their own way. Others were too
>>>>> damn lazy to care, though, so reforms had to be made by implementing work
>>>>> requirements.
>>>>> 
>>>>> But those requirements are so minor that recipients are getting off easy.
>>>>> 
>>>>> For those of you who may not remember, back during the reform debate, some
>>>>> literally thought they were entitled to welfare money as their due. That
>>>>> hasn't changed, and that's why these people need to be stigmatized. They
>>>>> need to be made to feel bad about the position they have put themselves
>>>>> in.
>>>>> 
>>>>> And it's not just the welfare queens, either.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There are a lot of people who are in positions due to their own decisions
>>>>> who somehow think they deserve special treatment. You majored in Lesbian
>>>>> Fruit Bat Studies in college, and you can't get a job? No wonder you
>>>>> can't. You've proven you're too irresponsible to be trusted with your own
>>>>> oxygen supply, much less anything that requires the least bit of
>>>>> responsibility beyond putting on clothes to cover your reproductive parts.
>>>>> 
>>>>> You see racism everywhere around you, and that's why you're an a**? Maybe
>>>>> what you chalk up to racism is because you're an insufferable piece of
>>>>> filth, and people don't care about your ethnicity, just that you're a
>>>>> horrible human being.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Communist? Enough said, mockery and laughter to follow.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Too many people get away with being terrible in various ways. We need to
>>>>> stigmatize these people for exactly what they are: Con artists, deadbeats,
>>>>> and pathetic excuses for human beings barely qualified to turn oxygen into
>>>>> carbon dioxide.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sure, there's a line there. Each of ours might be a little different, but
>>>>> there's a big difference between a disabled veteran who can't work versus
>>>>> someone really upset that our tax dollars won't be available to fund their
>>>>> eyebrow waxing. Those who cross that line need to be the subject of scorn,
>>>>> if for no other reason than to make it loudly apparent that it's
>>>>> unacceptable to do that when you can work.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Do enough of that, shame people into cleaning up their lives on their own,
>>>>> without expecting someone to do it for them, and we really will make
>>>>> America great again.
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/tomknighton/2025/11/07/its-time-to-
>>>>> stigmatize-some-people-again-n2666120
>>> 
>>> This rant spreads old welfare myths. SNAP doesn’t pay $1,000 a month to
>>> individuals, can’t be spent on tattoos or nails, and most recipients already
>>> work. Shaming poor families doesn’t make them more self-sufficient — it just
>>> fuels resentment and misinformation. Poverty isn’t a moral failure, and
>>> mocking people who need help says more about the accuser than about those
>>> struggling to eat.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> This type of scam is quite prevelant and it crosses all ethnic backgrounds.
>>>> These days scamming the system, which is very easy to do if you know how, is
>>>> worn as a badge of honor.
>>>> NOT by the people who really need assistance but by the leeches and grifters
>>>> who are able to work but refuse to or who collect government checks and work
>>>> tax
>>>> free off the books.
>>>> 
>>>> And it would surprise you how many people with fancy homes, high end cars,
>>>> extravegant
>>>> vacations are indeed scamming  the system.
>>>> Why?
>>>> Because it is so darn easy and in the past the government did not do anything
>>>> but the most
>>>> basic checks for eligibility.
>>>> 
>>>> That has all changed with the trump administration and the amount of fraud and
>>>> waste in
>>>> the government assistance programs is staggering. And these are funds that
>>>> could be allocated to
>>>> people who really need some assistance for whatever reason.
>>>> 
>>>> Of course if you point this out you will be labeled a bigot, racist and so
>>>> forth.
>>>> It's the classic tactic of the demonrats.
>>>> The old "do you want people to starve?" shtick.
>>>> The problem the demonrats have is that the voters are not falling for this
>>>> routine anymore and hence
>>>> the government shutdown where the demonrats attempted to pull the bigot,
>>>> republicans want you to starve
>>>> game once again but failed to mention one "minor fact" which is NOBODY wants
>>>> people to starve however
>>>> the republicans AND the voters do not want to fund welfare, healthcare and so
>>>> forth for illegal migrants.
>>>> They kept leaving that part out but the voters quickly caught on to the ruse.
>>>> And as for medical care, if an illegal is in dire need of medical care, patch
>>>> him or her up and once
>>>> well enough to travel deport them back to their home country.
>>>> 
>>>> The system is not designed to accomodate the massive number of invaders that
>>>> Biden allowed into the country.
>>>> You might want to ask UK and Germany about that one.
>>>> It's not sustainable.
>>>> 
>>>> Laws are in place for a reason. A country without laws that are enforced is no
>>>> longer a country but simply a wasteland
>>>> run by anarchy.
>>>> If the demonrat leftists don't like the laws, vote out the representatives who
>>>> support them.
>>> 
>>> The fraud narrative here is baseless -- verified rates are under 1%. The
>>> language about "invaders" and "demonrats" borrows directly from
>>> white-supremacist propaganda that paints immigrants and welfare recipients as
>>> subhuman threats. Undocumented immigrants can't even get federal welfare
>>> benefits. As I have noted, you right wingers, and especially you white
>>> supremacists, are all about tribalism and scapegoating -- and you (you
>>> personally) prove it time and time again.
>> 
>> You sound like an NPR brainwashed liberal.
> 
> I look to evidence, reason, logic and care about equal rights and the
> environment. So, sure, most people categorize that as "liberal".

Other than your opinions on the topic being discussed, nobody cares
about your opinions on the environment and your evidence is severely
lacking.
Please stay on topic.



 
>> While your points might have been somewhat true 20 years ago that is
>> no longer the case.
>> While I don't support calling democrats demonrats labeling illegal
>> migrants as invaders is accurate.
> 
> Nope.

Yep.
 
>> What term would you use?
> 
> Undocumented workers -- ones who improve our economy and are needed. Still we
> should make a better system. The current black market system is insane.

Tell that the various people who have been killed, raped, lives
destroyed by truckers who can't read highway signs, trafficked, drugs,
slave labor and so forth.
They came into the USA illegally and thus they are invaders.
You are using the well worn argument that "immigrants built the
country" which doesn't apply to illegal immigrants.

In the past maybe you can make an argument for that but currently you
have no argument at all.
 
>> https://www.whitehouse.gov/criminals/
> 
> The White House does have criminals -- starting with the felon who is the
> president.

Goal post move along with a straw man argument.
Please do your best to stay on topic.
>> <https://youtu.be/ezNmAv1ohCo?si=kX1SXbnAFs-6ZqQm>
>> 
>> <https://moneywise.com/news/minnesota-removes-800-medicaid-providers-from-system-in-effort-to-tackle-systemic-fraud-heres-how-itll-impact-access-to-care>
>> 
>> <https://www.middletownpress.com/news/article/medicaid-fraud-ramon-apellaniz-sentenced-21138478.php>
>> 
>> The list is endless.
> 
> Statistically citizens are more violent. You are looking at appeals to
> emotion.


Once again you are moving the goal posts.
We are discussing fraudulent government assistance although you make a
false comparison because crimes committed by illegal's are almost 100%
preventable if they were not allowed into the country in the first
place.
So you lose again.

>> So stop quoting your progressive cherry picked stats and start waking
>> up because people who work hard to earn money are fed up with those on
>> the take scamming the system.
> 
> You are against stats... and have nothing to counter them. As you said, I am
> "liberal", meaning I use evidence, reason, logic and care about equal rights
> and the environment

Many links were presented.
You ignored them to make a baseless accusation against me.
Here's another one for you to not read.

<https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4351884/posts>
These are studies by the USDA and others reprinted.


>> Public assistance is there as a safety net for people who,by no fault
>> of their own have fallen on hard times.
> 
> And yet the president -- a felon -- is in court trying to starve them.

Straw man and goal post move yet again.
 
>> It's not designed to support 3 generations of able bodied citizens on
>> welfare.
> 
> Our current system of funding the rich and demonizing the poor is irrational
> and immoral.

Straw man and goal post move yet again.
And nobody is demonizing the poor, it is simple being stated, based
upon the evidence that fraud is running rampant. 
I stated as much above. People who are truly entitled to assistance
deserve to receive it.
For someone who claims to use logic and present evidence and facts you
have failed miserably and that's because you cannot defend people who
are manipulating the system fraudulently.
And there are a lot of them.
FWIW I've read other posts by you Mr. Brock and this seems to be a
pattern with you.