Welfare Rights

I’ve read somwhere that most of the poorest people are only there temporarily, until they get back on their feet. Undoubtedly there are those who abuse the system and perpetuate the problem with their kids. I wouldn’t say that the problem is with the idea of welfare, just the execution. It is way too hard to get off of it, so some people just say, “Screw it, I’ll stay!” My aunt went on it after her husband left her. She had three kids. Welfare took care of food, daycare and education. She found out if she made any kind of money, even very short hours, all benefits were taken away. She couldn’t afford school and daycare on a part-time job, so she stayed on it until my family saved up enough to help her make the jump. The system needs to change to make it more effective and at the same time discourage the multiple generation welfare families.

To-Shin Do

I hate the idea of “welfare rights.” I hate the view that you are somehow entitled to a government handout. If you say someone has a right to a government handout, then you’re basically telling them they can just walk up to a hard working, tax paying American and take their money. What because it’s run through the government, it isn’t the same as stealing?

Nevertheless, I don’t think disenfranchisement is right. Sometimes (agreed, not always) people really can’t help but need some government help. Besides, some forms of government assitance can be an investment. The benefits may outweigh the costs.

Oh and…

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
60% of Americans will need some financial assistance during their lifetimes… food stamps, welfare, etc.

The vast majority of people on welfare are women and children.

So no, children should not be allowed to vote. Everyone else, okay.[/quote]

120% BULLSHIT.

Lumpy, I was actually going to be on yoru side this time, but then you had to go ahead and say something stupid.

You’re case would be so much stronger if you had a fact that was even remotely believable.

If this “stat” includes student loans, social security, medicare/medicaid, etc., then probably so. But at that rate, if you include subsidies (including tax deductions), then it’s probably much closer to 100%.

Another angle on this is if a woman has a child and decides to accept welfare should birth control be mandatory?

lincono,

What makes you think that they vote now? I would guess that only 20% or so of all welfare recipients vote. I would like to see some facts on this.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
lincono,

What makes you think that they vote now? I would guess that only 20% or so of all welfare recipients vote. I would like to see some facts on this.[/quote]

If I spent my time researching the voting habits of welfare recipients I would have to sign up for welfare since I couldn’t earn a living; or I could apply for a govt. grant!! (another form of welfare??) LOL. 20% is as good a guess as I might make, if that high. But since every vote counts this is too many. Remember Florida?

Does anyone know how many people recieve wellfare, and the average length of stay on wellfare? These would be interestign points.

I think that we should pay more to wellfare recipients for a shorter period of time and they should be required to work on building up the community they live in while on it. I haven’t seen a poor area where a lot of people who are on wellfare live that wasn’t a shithole (regardless if it is urban or rural).

I have never had a problem seeing my tax dollars go towards feeding children and the disabled. However, when you have an able bodied person who can never seem to find a job, that is where I draw the line.

Short term benefits while they perform some sort of public works program is probably the best way to go.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
lincono,

What makes you think that they vote now? I would guess that only 20% or so of all welfare recipients vote. I would like to see some facts on this.[/quote]

Hard to gather facts on who doesn’t vote – and they would be approximations based on some amalgamation of registered voters and population statistics (not all the people who are eligible to vote are registered).

Side note: This perfectly illustrates why you need to ignore any poll that is not based on “likely voters,” which means those who have an actual history of voting (self-reported, natch). Surveys of adults, or even registered voters, will capture the opinions of many who cannot be bothered to actually pull the lever.

[quote]KevinKovach wrote:
Does anyone know how many people recieve wellfare, and the average length of stay on wellfare? These would be interestign points.

I think that we should pay more to wellfare recipients for a shorter period of time and they should be required to work on building up the community they live in while on it. I haven’t seen a poor area where a lot of people who are on wellfare live that wasn’t a shithole (regardless if it is urban or rural).[/quote]

Good ideas. Welfare should be a safety net, not a lifestyle. This is an important issue and it suprises me that more people don’t understand how much this “lifestyle” affects us and brings us down as a society. As a side note, I was approached recently by a strapping, healthy individual who asked me for money, and I responded that I can’t help him, his response, “I don’t need any help”— so why did he ask me for money? LOL

You can thank President Johnson (a democrat) and his “War on Poverty” for the welfare mess that we have today. What was he thinking? How do you encourage people to work by rewarding them for not working? How foolish!

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I said all that to get to this story, which I think sums up the welfare system.[/quote]

Your experience sounds like my mother’s experience while my father was overseas during Vietnam. The primary difference was that my mother just didn’t know she qualified for the programs, which is another failure in the system.

Unfortunately, your story doesn’t sum up the system. What it sums up is the mentality of many welfare recipients, which OUGHT to piss you off – because they neither value nor appreciate the government’s assistance.

I don’t deny that there are bad people on welfare, or that people defraud the system, or that people are ignorant and do stupid things like buy steak for dogs. I do, however, deny that it is the system that has made them this way.

The welfare system is designed to help people who are actively trying to become self-sufficient. Unfortunately, many welfare recipients have no intention of becoming self-sufficient. The system is not designed for them; they should have a different system, preferably something involving a swift kick in the ass.

But the system fails in only a few specific ways, most of them being in a lack of availability. Owing to the large number of undeserving recipients, benefit amounts are low, and waiting lists for most programs are obnoxiously long.

It’s clear to me that we need to address the problem of undeserving recipients, and I think the easiest way to do that is by progress – if you are unable to reduce your dependence on welfare each year, that dependence should be reduced FOR you.

Essentially, welfare payments should exist on a sliding scale based on your income, and you should be REQUIRED to raise your income by at least one bracket each year. So after a given number of years, regardless of your progress, you’re off welfare for a waiting period (at least one year).

It took me about two years to go from homeless bum to salaried professional. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect anyone else to make the same kind of progress within five years.

CDarklock:

Well stated!

CD:
I’ll agree that there are those who need some help. I’l agree that there are many people out there, like yourself, who will take the help they need and better themselves immeasurably.

My problem is - why does it have to be the gov’t doing the helping?

Why can’ the gov’t get out of the way and let the private sector take care of it’s own?

The corruption and red tape created by the government’s benevolence makes me doubt the sincerity with which the Feds can actually address a need.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
My problem is - why does it have to be the gov’t doing the helping?[/quote]

Because nobody else is doing it.

That’s the real problem. We’ve managed to teach ourselves that businesses do not owe anything to their communities, and instead are responsible only to their shareholders. I think this is wrong in one of the worst possible ways, but all I can do about it is support my own community.

When my company’s big enough, I’ll start thinking about expanding that work farther – because while I can’t make other companies act responsibly, I can at least try and make them feel guilty.

Great example of why the welfare system is out of date and needs to be completely re-invented:

  1. My close friend is a paraplegic, car accident since high school after being hit by a car, wheelchair bound. Beautiful girl. Never been on welfare. Family history of financial hardship. Her dad left her mom when she was 18, she was the oldest kid, so she took two jobs to help her mom pay the mortgage and care for her younger siblings. Her siblings are now adults and she works two jobs, and with her husband has bought a house.

  2. My friend’s ex wife. On welfare (food stamps, cash), receives child support, lives with her mom and dad. He pays all the kids extras because she never has money for incidentals like out of pocket medical payments, medications, school supplies or extracurricular activites for the kids. She wears only designer clothing (Dolce and Gabbana, Guess, etc.) Last week just got herself breast implants. On welfare, can’t afford to take care of the kids’ needs, but can afford the time and money for cosmetic surgery.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Hey Lincono… why shouldn’t they be allowed to vote, when in some states illegals are allowed to vote? (school board elections)…

[quote]wolfnuts wrote:
Hey Lincono… why shouldn’t they be allowed to vote, when in some states illegals are allowed to vote? (school board elections)… [/quote]

An excellent question, how about if we deport the non-working welfare types (legal and illegal)and keep the illegal aliens who do work. Seriously, our govt. has dropped the ball in many areas and immigration is one of many misguided, moronic agencies that have failed. Come to think of it the majority of bureacrats should be deported! LOL

If it were up to me, there would be no welfare voting because there would be no damn welfare. RLTW

rangertab75

[quote]rangertab75 wrote:
If it were up to me, there would be no welfare voting because there would be no damn welfare. RLTW

rangertab75[/quote]

Then how would all the bleeding heart liberals buy the computers they use to post on this forum?

THE ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER

The Original Version…

The ant busts his butt in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he’s a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter so he dies out in the cold.

The New Liberal Version…

It starts out the same but when winter comes the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving. CBS, NBC, and ABC show up and show pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to film of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can it be, in a country of such wealth that this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so? Then a representative of the NAAGB (The National Association of Green Bugs) shows up on Night Line and charges the ant with “Green Bias” and makes the case that the grasshopper is the victim of 30 million years of greenism. Kermit the frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when he sings “It’s Not Easy Being Green.”

The democrats make a special guest appearances on the evening news shows proclaiming that they will do everything they can for the grasshopper who has been denied the prosperity he deserves by those who benefited unfairly during the summer.

Finally the EEOC drafts the “Economic Equity and Anti-Greenism Act” RECTRO-ACTIVE to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and having nothing left to pay his Retro-Active taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he’s in…which just happens to be the ant’s old house… crumbles around him since he doesn’t know how to maintain it. The ant has disappeared in the snow. And on the TV; which the grasshopper bought by selling most of the ant’s food, the Democrats announce that a new era of “Fairness” has dawned in America.