Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are they going to enforce this?

Seems like four pages of posters missed this point.

This is completely unenforceable. This is nothing more than class warfare on the poor, Ronald Reagan's Cadillac driving Welfare Queen (who didn't actually exist) all over again.

Kansas GOP is driving that state into the ground fiscally...pay no attention, let's scapegoat the poors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholics believe in the dignity of the poor. This is the opposite.

Tattoos amd gambling are dignified in the eyes of the Catholic church?

Allowing people to make their own choices, is an important


For people who rely on public assistance for everything, there are already many restrictions. Food stamps, WIC, medicaid, housing assistance, daycare subsidy . . . All of these forms of aid are targeted to specific needs. Cash benefits through TANF are usually a small portion of the package. Allowing people to make their own choices, and allocate this portion of their resources as they see fit, is appropriate.

As outlined by you, maybe we are providing too much. What incentives are we providing to them to get a job if the taxpayers are paying for everything?

"incentive . . . to get a job" sounds like slavery. Who are you to tell them they have to work?

It's a free country. Maybe they don't want to work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really mean! It's horrible to have to be forced onto welfare instead of working. And if that's not punishment enough, now people from fly-over country and imposing restrictions to punish people for being poor!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/04/06/kansas-wants-to-ban-welfare-recipients-from-seeing-movies-going-swimming-on-governments-dime/

Regular folks are allowed to get tattoos, take the family to the movies, and maybe have a little fun once in a while at the casino; why shouldn't people from lesser-resources communities have the same rights?

FORCED onto welfare? What a joke, OP.

Anonymous wrote:You guys are suckers.

Kansas' budget is a dumpster fire, so much so that some school districts are closing early because of Brownback's idiotic cuts (http://www.kansas.com/news/state/article17246126.html )

Please pay no attention to that....let's beat this welfare mother like a pinata because she wants to take her kids to the pool.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholics believe in the dignity of the poor. This is the opposite.

Tattoos amd gambling are dignified in the eyes of the Catholic church?

Allowing people to make their own choices, is an important


For people who rely on public assistance for everything, there are already many restrictions. Food stamps, WIC, medicaid, housing assistance, daycare subsidy . . . All of these forms of aid are targeted to specific needs. Cash benefits through TANF are usually a small portion of the package. Allowing people to make their own choices, and allocate this portion of their resources as they see fit, is appropriate.

As outlined by you, maybe we are providing too much. What incentives are we providing to them to get a job if the taxpayers are paying for everything?

"incentive . . . to get a job" sounds like slavery. Who are you to tell them they have to work?

It's a free country. Maybe they don't want to work.

Anonymous wrote:Really mean! It's horrible to have to be forced onto welfare instead of working. And if that's not punishment enough, now people from fly-over country and imposing restrictions to punish people for being poor!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/04/06/kansas-wants-to-ban-welfare-recipients-from-seeing-movies-going-swimming-on-governments-dime/

Regular folks are allowed to get tattoos, take the family to the movies, and maybe have a little fun once in a while at the casino; why shouldn't people from lesser-resources communities have the same rights?

Anonymous wrote:Really mean! It's horrible to have to be forced onto welfare instead of working. And if that's not punishment enough, now people from fly-over country and imposing restrictions to punish people for being poor!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/04/06/kansas-wants-to-ban-welfare-recipients-from-seeing-movies-going-swimming-on-governments-dime/

Regular folks are allowed to get tattoos, take the family to the movies, and maybe have a little fun once in a while at the casino; why shouldn't people from lesser-resources communities have the same rights?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholics believe in the dignity of the poor. This is the opposite.

Tattoos amd gambling are dignified in the eyes of the Catholic church?

Allowing people to make their own choices, is an important


For people who rely on public assistance for everything, there are already many restrictions. Food stamps, WIC, medicaid, housing assistance, daycare subsidy . . . All of these forms of aid are targeted to specific needs. Cash benefits through TANF are usually a small portion of the package. Allowing people to make their own choices, and allocate this portion of their resources as they see fit, is appropriate.

As outlined by you, maybe we are providing too much. What incentives are we providing to them to get a job if the taxpayers are paying for everything?

"incentive . . . to get a job" sounds like slavery. Who are you to tell them they have to work?

It's a free country. Maybe they don't want to work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholics believe in the dignity of the poor. This is the opposite.

Tattoos amd gambling are dignified in the eyes of the Catholic church?

Allowing people to make their own choices, is an important


For people who rely on public assistance for everything, there are already many restrictions. Food stamps, WIC, medicaid, housing assistance, daycare subsidy . . . All of these forms of aid are targeted to specific needs. Cash benefits through TANF are usually a small portion of the package. Allowing people to make their own choices, and allocate this portion of their resources as they see fit, is appropriate.

As outlined by you, maybe we are providing too much. What incentives are we providing to them to get a job if the taxpayers are paying for everything?

"incentive . . . to get a job" sounds like slavery. Who are you to tell them they have to work?

It's a free country. Maybe they don't want to work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholics believe in the dignity of the poor. This is the opposite.

Tattoos amd gambling are dignified in the eyes of the Catholic church?

Allowing people to make their own choices, is an important


For people who rely on public assistance for everything, there are already many restrictions. Food stamps, WIC, medicaid, housing assistance, daycare subsidy . . . All of these forms of aid are targeted to specific needs. Cash benefits through TANF are usually a small portion of the package. Allowing people to make their own choices, and allocate this portion of their resources as they see fit, is appropriate.

As outlined by you, maybe we are providing too much. What incentives are we providing to them to get a job if the taxpayers are paying for everything?

Anonymous wrote:How are they going to enforce this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholics believe in the dignity of the poor. This is the opposite.

Tattoos amd gambling are dignified in the eyes of the Catholic church?

Allowing people to make their own choices, is an important


For people who rely on public assistance for everything, there are already many restrictions. Food stamps, WIC, medicaid, housing assistance, daycare subsidy . . . All of these forms of aid are targeted to specific needs. Cash benefits through TANF are usually a small portion of the package. Allowing people to make their own choices, and allocate this portion of their resources as they see fit, is appropriate.