Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25
  1. #21  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by fettpett View Post
    did she commit fraud? and did the State change the laws on lottery winnings after the guy won the $2 Million last year and was still collecting SNAP? If not, then within the law she didn't do anything "wrong" legally. Ethically...hell yeah, dumb entitled bitch shouldn't have it.
    We are often told by corporations and millionaires in essence that there is no such thing as ethics; they maintain that the only relevant question is whether it is legal. We are told that in the absence of a legal prohibition, a corporation has not only a right but a duty to act solely in its own interest to the exclusion of impact or morality. We have been told that holding income out of reach of American taxes is legal and therefore smart, that there is nothing unpatriotic about it. And we have wannabes who cheer on this mentality in hopes that someday they will win the lottery and actually be one of those people (see Michael Medved's program about this).

    What this woman has done may well be illegal : I don't know. I don't know if the "award" is month to month in which case it would appear that she ceased to qualify when she cashed the check, or if it's annual, in which case she probably didn't violate the law. I also understand the public reaction to her continuing to use the card- because most of the public reacts on moral analysis rather than legal analysis.

    I wonder how many critics look at this as one subsidy compared to another.

    Does Big Sugar stop taking the subsidy when they make a profit? Do they twist the books so that they don't make a profit so they can take the subsidy? How about corn and other growers? If they make a profit, do they return the subsidy? How about oil? How many of the pigs at the public trough are making a fortune while collecting a subsidy? How many million dollar CEO's cash their paycheck drawn on subsidized accounts?

    This woman shouldn't take food stamps when she's flush. No doubt. But why does everyone land on this ant when there are gigantic hogs at the trough?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    We are often told by corporations and millionaires in essence that there is no such thing as ethics; they maintain that the only relevant question is whether it is legal. We are told that in the absence of a legal prohibition, a corporation has not only a right but a duty to act solely in its own interest to the exclusion of impact or morality. We have been told that holding income out of reach of American taxes is legal and therefore smart, that there is nothing unpatriotic about it. And we have wannabes who cheer on this mentality in hopes that someday they will win the lottery and actually be one of those people (see Michael Medved's program about this).

    What this woman has done may well be illegal : I don't know. I don't know if the "award" is month to month in which case it would appear that she ceased to qualify when she cashed the check, or if it's annual, in which case she probably didn't violate the law. I also understand the public reaction to her continuing to use the card- because most of the public reacts on moral analysis rather than legal analysis.

    I wonder how many critics look at this as one subsidy compared to another.

    Does Big Sugar stop taking the subsidy when they make a profit? Do they twist the books so that they don't make a profit so they can take the subsidy? How about corn and other growers? If they make a profit, do they return the subsidy? How about oil? How many of the pigs at the public trough are making a fortune while collecting a subsidy? How many million dollar CEO's cash their paycheck drawn on subsidized accounts?

    This woman shouldn't take food stamps when she's flush. No doubt. But why does everyone land on this ant when there are gigantic hogs at the trough?

    Every welfare and child welfare case in Michigan receives a redetermination of eligibility every 6 months. For foster care cases, it is about whether the case is funded by the state, feds or by the county. For welfare cases, it's to determine eligibility. If she reported her winnings, the redetermination would have been triggered automatically by the computer system.

    She had to post a $10,000 bond.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    15,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post

    This woman shouldn't take food stamps when she's flush. No doubt. But why does everyone land on this ant when there are gigantic hogs at the trough?
    Because while you're singling out one entity, there are thousands if not more people like this woman, that's why(not lottery winners abusing welfare but people abusing it in general).
    The Obama Administration: Deny. Deflect. Blame.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post

    Does Big Sugar stop taking the subsidy when they make a profit? Do they twist the books so that they don't make a profit so they can take the subsidy?
    Yeah I watch my company's quarterly report with interest. We have really good accountants. It seems like when it's time to demonstrate our value to the market, our debts are "investments" and therefore "assets." When it's time to pay taxes, the exact same debts are written off to reduce taxable income. It's perfectly legal, and you are correct... in business there is no morals and ethics, just what's legal and not legal. Although, I'm not sure why exactly this itself is a case for less regulations (laws governing business).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    Because while you're singling out one entity, there are thousands if not more people like this woman, that's why(not lottery winners abusing welfare but people abusing it in general).
    My friend Rick grows Christmas trees on his 90 acres in suburban Maryland. This allows him to maintain his status as "agricultural exemption" without which his property taxes would be immense. So while everyone else is paying taxes on every square inch of his quarter acre, my friend gets to play gentleman farmer and pay relatively little tax on 90 acres.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •