Welfare Solution #389

["Lynne L. Harrison" <lharrison@mhv.net>]

At 07:30 AM 8/22/97 +0200, Anonymous wrote:
>
>Welfare Solution #389:
>  Many in the welfair class have their basic needs met by the government
>and then steal to buy heroin.
>  How about this? - When a person on welfare is busted for heroin use,
>or theft to support a habit, the State thereafter sends the person's
>welfare check to a Crime Restitution fund and lets the person keep
>stealing, only now it is for the purpose of supplying their own
>basic needs.

In NY, when a defendant gets convicted of a crime including a drug offense,
s/he has to pay a mandatory surcharge part of which is a Crime Victims'
Fee.  [Query: who is the victim in a drug case? -- but I digress...].
Also, if it was a crime where the victim suffered financial losses, the
defendant not only has to pay the Crime Victim's Fee but also restitution
to the victim.

Additionally, pursuant to Federal Law, anyone convicted of a drug charge
and, who is residing is federally-subsidized housing, becomes subject to
eviction proceedings.  [Quirk: if one family member is engaged in such
business activities, the entire family is captured under the law's umbrella
but, again, I digress..].


>  The crime rate stays the same, but the victims receive some amount
>of recompensation.

So-called crime rates are subject to the compilation *and* interpretation
of statistics, and for those of us who were lucky enough to have studied
Statistics, we know that these so-called statistical rates are ripe for
producing the desired results versus providing an accurate statistical
account.

Case in point: Prior to Reagan's Administration, the Armed Forces were
never included in the employed or non-employed categories.  Reagan added
the Armed Forces to the employed category, and the masses were tickled pink
when the government announced that employment rates increased dramatically.

 
>Damn, I'm smart...

Since I don't know you, I am in no position to comment.  You may be smart,
highly  intelligent, or a genius - or you may possess the analytical
processes of a gerbil.  Whichever category you are within, perhaps you
should keep in mind the old saying: "It's a thin line between genius and
insanity."  [A little appetizer for thought...].




**************************************************************************
Lynne L. Harrison, Esq.     |    Lazlo's Chinese Relatively Axiom:
Poughkeepsie, New York      |    "No matter how great your triumphs or
lharrison@mhv.net           |    how tragic your defeats, approximately
http://www.dueprocess.com   |    one billion Chinese couldn't care less."
**************************************************************************

DISCLAIMER:  I am not your attorney; you are not my client.
             Accordingly, the above is *NOT* legal advice.