kokigami

requesting to take her is a viable option.. if you have the resources.

that would be kidnapping.. btw..

I wouldn't advise that tack though. If there is any estate, it looks like a power grab for inheritence control. Ask for a gaurdian ad litum.. (spelling?)

https://dss.sc.gov/content/customers/protection/aps/index.aspx google is your friend. That is the place to start. They should know of elder care attorneys as well.

Interesting. I would argue that liberals have a mixed view on intellectual property rights. My view is that our current IP law is problematic, but, if there is anything that can be said to have been created without theft.. it is ideas. IP "rights", therefore are the most valid of all property rights.. Mostly I find this question an interesting diversion. It might make an interesting thread..

so, the only property right you don't approve of is intellectual property? Really?

well, have a warm fuzzy on me then.

As and example, watch the events transpiring with Amazon..

It is, but I have a different theory on why it happens.

A bit non sequitur? I am fully aware of the importance of an Ostrich. But, you will (probably refuse to) admit that humans tend to prioritize things that are violent, and Capitalist news reporting amplifies that behavior. The result is that when a peaceful and a violent group are competing for prominence, the violent group will win out in the western world. You have little experience with peaceful Islam because you don't look deeper than the prominent groups. No, but I have already provided a link above on the Islamic worlds view on terrorism. You are now invited to find research that implies the Muslims of the Philippines are active anti Zionists..

No, our history has been a repetition on the theme of you accusing me of being socialist, and my stating that I am not. This happens whenever I advance that socialism is not the great evil, and appears to be a reflex reaction on your part. I have stated that I have socialistic tendencies.. But pure isms are inherently faulty. I avoid them, and have done so far longer than I have been here.

I have never claimed to be a socialist. I have admitted that socialism is not, for me, a bogey man that sends shivers down my spine, but a system of economics that has merit in some situations. Just the same view I have toward capitalism. The purpose of welfare was to create a safety net for those who found themselves in need. But, as it is a compromise with other interests, it has been mis directed. That isn't an uncommon outcome in out system of laws. It has been stripped down to be sub subsistence support, with little to no provision for rebuilding the capacity for recipients to help themselves. That would require more funding. I think progressives would be happy to provide that funding and build a system that moves people off the welfare roles. I think conservatives work very hard to prevent it from being built. I don't think that is because conservatives want to make people dependent, just that they often aren't imaginative enough to see another system than the one they have.

not really a fair request. Open hostility is required for a group to gain prominence in the western psyche. no, I mean the arab world. And to a lesser extent the persians.. The further you get from the region, the less likely a muslim is dedicated to the eradication of the jewish state. Nomads see their nomadic routes as their homelands, so that point is kinda weak.. huh, imagine that..

Israel is a bit of a touch point, in that it represents the very thing that the arab world is most upset about, European and western intervention into the middle east. The fairly wide spread feeling that Israel shouldn't be there is based, in part, on the fact that it was created out of whole cloth by outsiders without input from locals. Yes, Israel had once been on the site, but it had been gone for a long time. It is my opinion that it should not have been re established, at least not there. But it was, and I don't advocate eliminating it now. However, that particular issue is ripe with problems that are probably best left to another thread. However, the Muslim world is much bigger than the middle east, so narrowing you focus to it is going to give you an incomplete picture of Islam. That and the fact that you have approached it primarily from a single vantage point, a military vantage point.. might be biasing your understanding.

kinda sad when you copy and endorse your own posts.. but, lets have at this.. More significantly, the last part. The idea that welfare is about creating dependency. Now, I agree, to some extent, that this is what it is doing. Probably for different reasons than you think.. but to claim it is the intent seems to beg some extraordinary evidence. I tend to think it is a side effect of some very capitalist impulses that are at work in welfare design. For example, it is possible for the poor to get subsidies for rental costs, but not for mortgage costs. This is a system designed to move government money into the hands of those who already own real wealth in property. It appeals to those who think that welfare should be about keeping people afloat, but only barely so, as it doesn't help them get out of the debt traps.

contact the good people at HQ. They will update your records. You may well have to buy a new set of credentials. http://ulchq.com/contact.htm

which brings up a critical point. Even though, in theory, many disabled people can work, if properly accommodated by their employers, it is very difficult to find someone interested in taking on the hassle of accommodating them. And, since umemployment is positive, they generally don't have to. They may, if the person has specific skills that are hard to find, but that is not a common situation. It is not really that common that people won't work.

one of the nicer aspects of this forum is that the heat doesn't often boil over. Not sure if it is the members, or the mods, or a combination. Not sure how it is in the secret debate club, because I like my discussions in public.

while I don't dis hard work, it does sound like you are, realistically, one unexpected event from qualifying. Or, with a little good luck, from not feeling you might need help. But if your luck runs bad, you may find yourself less critical of the system..

the FSM provides a heaven with a beer volcano and a stripper factory. Can't get more real than that.

well, now I just don't believe you anymore. Either you lied before, or you are lying now, and so, where does that leave us, in a forum world composed only of words.. This is a reason anecdotal evidence is not to be trusted. agreed. In fact, it seems to me, a crack addict is more likely than a sober person to find themselves out of gas twice in a short period. But, five bucks isn't going to impact my day, so I can afford to take that risk. a data point isn't meant to represent the whole. It is just a data point. A different one than has been expressed by others. But it could serve to illustrate the earlier example of a poor person with an I phone syndrome. I have friends who are on assistance, in part because the initial divorce settlement was made while the father was newly employed, and not making much. So his contribution is very small, but he is now in a high earning two income situation, and can easily afford to give the kids toys, so, while they often don't have food, and they must get snap etc, the kids have some - not a lot, but some - 'spensive bling...

just a data point

you want to do some research and back up the claim..? this guy has done my work for me..

there a lot of working poor who can't get assistance. Agreed. But that doesn't mean there are not a lot of working poor on assistance. Because, there are A LOT of working poor. And the number is rising. And since the system for support is shrinking, more and more people will be working poor without assistance.. We do need welfare reform. How to reform it is the question. This has a great deal to do with wealth distribution. The current welfare system will help a person pay rent to a landlord, so the landlord benefits, but won't help to pay a mortgage, so the person benefits. That seems like a system rigged for those who own capital to keep others from obtaining capital. It will pay for food to a retailer, but, if you grow your own food, you can't redirect that money for other needs or investments. It generally will help in crisis, but not to try to prevent crisis (like heat assistance, or emergency medicine..) Welfare needs reform, because currently it incentivizes crisis. Tie the top tier tax rate to unemployment, and raise the minimum wage. redefine unemployment to include under-employment. Remove barriers to education - which is becoming a massive debt trap - and dismantle corporations. Forbid any congress person 9perhaps judges and executive branch as well) from taking any income, gifts, gratuities or favors other than their salary. that might be a good start.

Your experience is a data point, but just one amoung many. The fact that she can't get help now doesn't mean that there are not a lot of working poor who do get help. She has moved into the tar pit realm where assistance has disappeared but the path forward is not clear.