RTS, do you have any statistics to back up this claim? I'm only asking because it is human nature to focus on what we believe the truth to be and not see what goes against our beliefs.

 

RM, do you have any statistics?

Oh gosh, TB&G. It's been a while since I've read on the issue itself and would have to do some digging to find stats. Most of what I've spoke of in my post is what I've seen myself, people I've encountered, what I'm told by several friends I have that are currently and some that are no longer social workers.

There are many, many stories like what RM speaks of, she's absolutely correct there. But you may be shocked to know stories there are of abuse out there. It's very sad and disheartening.

Oh gosh, TB&G. It's been a while since I've read on the issue itself and would have to do some digging to find stats. Most of what I've spoke of in my post is what I've seen myself, people I've encountered, what I'm told by several friends I have that are currently and some that are no longer social workers.

There are many, many stories like what RM speaks of, she's absolutely correct there. But you may be shocked to know stories there are of abuse out there. It's very sad and disheartening.

 

I wouldn't be shocked that there is abuse. There is abuse in every situation.

 

You say what you speak of is what you see with your own eyes and what you have people tell you about. That's just my point. Is it possible that you (and those people that tell you) are keyed in to notice the abuses and thus get a skewed view. The same can be said on the opposite end of the spectrum, too, including myself. I've never noticed someone using food stamps on an iPhone. I've not known someone on welfare that had a new car. Years ago when I worked as a cashier at a local grocery store, we did have one customer that sent her kids in, each with a $1 food stamp to get a 3 cent piece of gum and bring her back the change so that she could buy herself some cigarettes. But, mostly I didn't notice anything with my food stamp customers out of the ordinary or of what implied abuse.

I wouldn't be shocked that there is abuse. There is abuse in every situation.

 

You say what you speak of is what you see with your own eyes and what you have people tell you about. That's just my point. Is it possible that you (and those people that tell you) are keyed in to notice the abuses and thus get a skewed view. The same can be said on the opposite end of the spectrum, too, including myself. I've never noticed someone using food stamps on an iPhone. I've not known someone on welfare that had a new car. Years ago when I worked as a cashier at a local grocery store, we did have one customer that sent her kids in, each with a $1 food stamp to get a 3 cent piece of gum and bring her back the change so that she could buy herself some cigarettes. But, mostly I didn't notice anything with my food stamp customers out of the ordinary or of what implied abuse.

Oh, I personally know people that have iPhones and use food stamps. I know people who refuse to work because they get more or about the same money on unemployment. I could take you around some surrounding areas, Covington, Price Hill and so on, where this sort of thing is prevalent.

The social workers I spoke of see a lot of cases every day of this abuse. We're not talking about just a few here. It's mind boggling.

Oh, I personally know people that have iPhones and use food stamps. I know people who refuse to work because they get more or about the same money on unemployment. I could take you around some surrounding areas, Covington, Price Hill and so on, where this sort of thing is prevalent.

The social workers I spoke of see a lot of cases every day of this abuse. We're not talking about just a few here. It's mind boggling.

 

But you say that abuse is happens more than a story to true need, as RM's was. Do you have anything solid on this beside the view of someone that may be just fixating on what their belief is, that abuse is more prevalant?

 

My view, from what I see in my community and my experiences, is that there is more need than abuse. I, too, may be fixating on what validates my opinion and not seeing what goes against it. I don't know. That's where I'd like to see some solid statistics.

I was speaking of the 2011 annual report on White House staff where female employees earned about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees.

 

What positions are these people holding? More male supervisors means higher pay for males. Who is in charge of hiring the White House staff? Isn't the staff at the White House there regardless of who the President is? Did Obama bring in his own staff for the Whote House?

But you say that abuse is happens more than a story to true need, as RM's was. Do you have anything solid on this beside the view of someone that may be just fixating on what their belief is, that abuse is more prevalant?

 

My view, from what I see in my community and my experiences, is that there is more need than abuse. I, too, may be fixating on what validates my opinion and not seeing what goes against it. I don't know. That's where I'd like to see some solid statistics.

Well, except for one, none of them are conservatives if that's what you're asking, so they don't have an axe to grind. Where abuse is concerned, it may be near impossible to get a real grasp statistic wise. I'll admit to you, even though I have read articles and seen stats in the past, mostly it's my opinion just as it's RM's opinion and as you yourself has said, it's your opinion. As I've told you though, I've personally seen more abuse that I've seen need. Often it started out as need and ended up in abuse. The social workers I know have seen more abuse overall than need as well. That speaks volumes to me.

What positions are these people holding? More male supervisors means higher pay for males. Who is in charge of hiring the White House staff? Isn't the staff at the White House there regardless of who the President is? Did Obama bring in his own staff for the Whote House?

Are you asking the same questions or any questions at all of the claims Obama and the left have made against those on the right where women's rights are concerned?

Are you asking the same questions or any questions at all of the claims Obama and the left have made against those on the right where women's rights are concerned?

 

Nope. Because I don't care. Women seem to be doing just fine to me. Now....back to my questions about the White House staff......

Well, except for one, none of them are conservatives if that's what you're asking, so they don't have an axe to grind. Where abuse is concerned, it may be near impossible to get a real grasp statistic wise. I'll admit to you, even though I have read articles and seen stats in the past, mostly it's my opinion just as it's RM's opinion and as you yourself has said, it's your opinion. As I've told you though, I've personally seen more abuse that I've seen need. Often it started out as need and ended up in abuse. The social workers I know have seen more abuse overall than need as well. That speaks volumes to me.

 

Even social workers are prone to seeing things they way that matches their beliefs. Until I see statistical data, I can't be sure that all of us aren't just playing into our own biases.

Nope. Because I don't care. Women seem to be doing just fine to me. Now....back to my questions about the White House staff......

Well, if you don't care, then why ask?

Even social workers are prone to seeing things they way that matches their beliefs. Until I see statistical data, I can't be sure that all of us aren't just playing into our own biases.

That's cool. But until I see unbiased data proving other wise, I have to go with I believe.

Well, if you don't care, then why ask?

 

Go back and read post 35. That is what I asked about. The staff of the White House. That's it.

 

Do I care about the claims from the right about Obama and the left where women's rights are concerned? No. What is this 1940? Did they strip of them of their right to vote? Are they firing women and telling them to go home and make babies? Are they kicking them out of the military? If more blacks had lost their jobs during Obama's watch would that mean they are stripping blacks of their rights also? What if it was men or white men? Are they stripping them of their rights? You'll have to forgive me if I don't fall into the whole Obama and the left are stripping women of their rights goose chase. It sounds like the right is running out of things to blame on Obama. The thought of it alone sounds too much like nonsense to take it seriously. So no, I don't care about that nonsense.

Go back and read post 35. That is what I asked about. The staff of the White House. That's it.

 

Do I care about the claims from the right about Obama and the left where women's rights are concerned? No. What is this 1940? Did they strip of them of their right to vote? Are they firing women and telling them to go home and make babies? Are they kicking them out of the military? If more blacks had lost their jobs during Obama's watch would that mean they are stripping blacks of their rights also? What if it was men or white men? Are they stripping them of their rights? You'll have to forgive me if I don't fall into the whole Obama and the left are stripping women of their rights goose chase. It sounds like the right is running out of things to blame on Obama. The thought of it alone sounds too much like nonsense to take it seriously. So no, I don't care about that nonsense.

And you'll forgive me if I don't fall into the whole Romney and the right are stripping women of their rights goose chase that the left claims because they're the ones that started this whole silly garbage. The reason is clear, his record alone isn't enough to hold Independent women that voted for him last time. Like I said to TB&G, strap yourself in, it's going to get ugly.

And you'll forgive me if I don't fall into the whole Romney and the right are stripping women of their rights goose chase that the left claims because they're the ones that started this whole silly garbage. The reason is clear, his record alone isn't enough to hold Independent women that voted for him last time. Like I said to TB&G, strap yourself in, it's going to get ugly.

 

No doubt. I'm tired of it already. :lol:

 

But I'll still check this forum daily. :lol: