MI man wins lottery and stays on welfare & food stamps

[Richard Cranium]

Long story short he won $2 million playing the lottery.  Lottery winnings are considered liquid assets and don't count toward income so that money did not affect his eligibility for welfare and food stamps.  And he's damn proud of himself.  He rationalizes staying on public assistance because the IRS took over half his winnings. 

Talk about working the system. 

Watch the video.....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/leroy-fick-lottery-winner-food-stamps_n_864113.html

[Old Moparz]

All the big corporations & banks do the exact same thing, so I'll toast to the little guy. 

[moparstuart]

All the big corporations & banks do the exact same thing, so I'll toast to the little guy. 

[Cooter]

Don't hate the Playa, hate the game...

[AKcharger]

Hmmmm I have nothing but contemp for this type of behavior, he's worse than Hitler!

[bull]

All the big corporations & banks do the exact same thing, so I'll toast to the little guy. 

Somehow it doesn't seem any more ethical to me. Oh well. Every man for himself, right?

[Old Moparz]

All the big corporations & banks do the exact same thing, so I'll toast to the little guy. 

Somehow it doesn't seem any more ethical to me. Oh well. Every man for himself, right?

You're 100% right, what he's doing isn't ethical, but on paper it's "legal" & what large corporations do regularly.

[doctor4766]

All the big corporations & banks do the exact same thing, so I'll toast to the little guy. 

Somehow it doesn't seem any more ethical to me. Oh well. Every man for himself, right?

You're 100% right, what he's doing isn't ethical, but on paper it's "legal" & what large corporations do regularly.

Don't make it right though huh?

[Road Dog]

Even though he won he's still a Big Loserrrr!

[moparsons]

He's a greedy bastard who needs kicked in the junk.

[twodko]

If this is legit, at the very least this butthead should be made to repay ALL public assistance plus interest and persecuted for welfare fraud. After this his lotto winnings should be reexamined and penalized as appropriate.

[learical1]

Long story short he won $2 million playing the lottery.  Lottery winnings are considered liquid assets and don't count toward income so that money did not affect his eligibility for welfare and food stamps.   And he's damn proud of himself.  He rationalizes staying on public assistance because the IRS took over half his winnings. 

emphasis added

I'm no lawyer, but I don't think he defrauded anybody.  Michigan needs to amend their qualifications for welfare and food stamps.  Assuming the rules of ex post facto apply, I doubt that Michigan could successfully get any more money out of the guy.  Mind you, the USA and Michigan already got more than half of the $2M he won, so it's questionable as to whether Michigan deserves to get any more money from him. 

[twodko]

Its the principle of it that irks me.

[last426]

What you are saying is that social security should be need based.  Let's ask the question:  assume you are flush with money and turn 65 -- gonna take the social security or do the "ethical" thing and refuse it?  Kim

[Richard Cranium]

Its the principle of it that irks me.

Agreed.

[Tilar]

What you are saying is that social security should be need based.  Let's ask the question:  assume you are flush with money and turn 65 -- gonna take the social security or do the "ethical" thing and refuse it?  Kim

That is a totally different thing. Social security is your money that you earned in the first place and then gave it to the government to hold for you.

[Richard Cranium]

Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of EBT cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then GET A JOB.



Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligations. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine and document all tattoos and piercings. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, smoke or get tats and piercings, then GET A JOB.



Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your "home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then GET A JOB ... and your own place.




Put me in charge of verification. In addition, you will either present a check stub from a JOB each week or you will report to a "government" JOB. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you.



We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good".


Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was considered demeaning and lowered self esteem.


If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current systemrewards them for continuing to make bad choices.



NOW
This is the biggie of the best ideas.


AND while you are on Government subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!



Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest.



You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Government welfare check.



If you want to vote, then GET A JOB.

[Tilar]

You run, I'll vote yes.    I'm not sure of the voting thing, but I'm all for the rest of that.

[RECHRGD]

What you are saying is that social security should be need based.  Let's ask the question:  assume you are flush with money and turn 65 -- gonna take the social security or do the "ethical" thing and refuse it?  Kim

That is a totally different thing. Social security is your money that you earned in the first place and then gave it to the government to hold for you.

Exactly!!!  I hate it when people equate SS with wellfare, as far as retirement benefits go.  I've paid into it all my life with the promise that I would receive the 'return on my investment' upon retirement.  I don't care if I've got a healthy portfolio or not.  You work for what you have and part of your earnings over the years is put away for YOU via SS.  The government was never supposed to access it for other WASTEFUL programs.

[Troy]

What you are saying is that social security should be need based.  Let's ask the question:  assume you are flush with money and turn 65 -- gonna take the social security or do the "ethical" thing and refuse it?  Kim

That is a totally different thing. Social security is your money that you earned in the first place and then gave it to the government to hold for you.

Exactly!!!  I hate it when people equate SS with wellfare, as far as retirement benefits go.  I've paid into it all my life with the promise that I would receive the 'return on my investment' upon retirement.  I don't care if I've got a healthy portfolio or not.  You work for what you have and part of your earnings over the years is put away for YOU via SS.  The government was never supposed to access it for other WASTEFUL programs.

FYI - one of the plans to "save" Social Security is to change it to "need based". In other words, if you are "rich" when you retire you get nothing - never mind that you paid more in than anyone else and actually saved what was left (after taxes) instead of blowing it.

Troy

[nh_mopar_fan]

"Lottery winnings are considered liquid assets and don't count toward income so that money did not affect his eligibility for welfare and food stamps."

Um, ok, I'll bite. Not income, eh? Why are the winnings taxed as income then?

[RECHRGD]

What you are saying is that social security should be need based.  Let's ask the question:  assume you are flush with money and turn 65 -- gonna take the social security or do the "ethical" thing and refuse it?  Kim

That is a totally different thing. Social security is your money that you earned in the first place and then gave it to the government to hold for you.

Exactly!!!  I hate it when people equate SS with wellfare, as far as retirement benefits go.  I've paid into it all my life with the promise that I would receive the 'return on my investment' upon retirement.  I don't care if I've got a healthy portfolio or not.  You work for what you have and part of your earnings over the years is put away for YOU via SS.  The government was never supposed to access it for other WASTEFUL programs.

FYI - one of the plans to "save" Social Security is to change it to "need based". In other words, if you are "rich" when you retire you get nothing - never mind that you paid more in than anyone else and actually saved what was left (after taxes) instead of blowing it.

Troy

Yes, I've heard that too.  There's gonna be a lot of pissed off seniors if that one ever passes.  Talk about your government breaking promises!  Bob

[RECHRGD]

"Lottery winnings are considered liquid assets and don't count toward income so that money did not affect his eligibility for welfare and food stamps."

Um, ok, I'll bite. Not income, eh? Why are the winnings taxed as income then?

It's taxed as capital gains.  Just a different term to allow them to jack up the percentage taken from you...

[stripedelete]

Wonder how he feels about "tax the rich" now?

[RECHRGD]

Wonder how he feels about "tax the rich" now?

  Good point!

[doctor4766]

Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of EBT cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then GET A JOB.



Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligations. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine and document all tattoos and piercings. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, smoke or get tats and piercings, then GET A JOB.



Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your "home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then GET A JOB ... and your own place.




Put me in charge of verification. In addition, you will either present a check stub from a JOB each week or you will report to a "government" JOB. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you.



We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good".


Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was considered demeaning and lowered self esteem.


If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current systemrewards them for continuing to make bad choices.



NOW
This is the biggie of the best ideas.


AND while you are on Government subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!



Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest.



You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Government welfare check.



If you want to vote, then GET A JOB.

Wow. A lot of that made sense but,I have 2 questions for you.

[stripedelete]

Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of EBT cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then GET A JOB.



Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligations. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine and document all tattoos and piercings. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, smoke or get tats and piercings, then GET A JOB.



Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your "home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then GET A JOB ... and your own place.




Put me in charge of verification. In addition, you will either present a check stub from a JOB each week or you will report to a "government" JOB. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you.



We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good".


Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was considered demeaning and lowered self esteem.


If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current systemrewards them for continuing to make bad choices.



NOW
This is the biggie of the best ideas.


AND while you are on Government subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!



Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest.



You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Government welfare check.



If you want to vote, then GET A JOB.

Really not a radical idea.  Our founding fathers said "no property, no vote".  We were a cash strapped nation in the beginning, so it centered on real estate instead of money.  While the currency has changed, we still face the same issue/threat.  We need to get back to, at least, a wieghted vote. 

[1970Moparmann]

Typical Government - " We are actively trying to reverse the rules and policies related to this issue".   

Even though this guy "shouldn't" be getting these benefits, more power to him.   

Maybe he's showing how ridiculous some of the laws and rules are ?