Able-Bodied People on Welfare

[Truth_and_Power]

What is the excuse for this? In the great depression they gave people jobs in public service when they couldn't find work. In today's society, the only excuse for not finding work is not looking, not trying, or continually losing the jobs you do get. Why should we support someone who refuses to support themself?

[Wndrtch]

Because, we're part of a "Great Society" now.

Too many Politicians think they're "Robin Hood", yet never bothered to read the complete, classic story and learn who Robin was. So, they took Disney's version, and made it national policy.

[Cobra]

A woman with young kids. If it would cost so much for daycare that she could make more staying home with them on welfare it's prolly the better idea. Why work your ass off at a job not to bring hardly any of it home.

[Truth_and_Power]

A woman with young kids. If it would cost so much for daycare that she could make more staying home with them on welfare it's prolly the better idea. Why work your ass off at a job not to bring hardly any of it home.


The problem is that it takes away the incentive to ever work, and provides the incentive to keep having young kids that you can't support.

[Cobra]

that depends on the person, many would rather work then be stuck taking care of a new baby every other year.

[Truth_and_Power]

As a taxpayer, I know I would rather have the streets clear of trash and our national parks in tip-top shape for my welfare dollars than incentivize the production of more poor children.

[Cobra]

So what, the kids should starve, be left home alone, not have a normally considered acceptable american lifestyle because their mother can't make enough to properly support them.

[Truth_and_Power]

So the kids should starve, be left home alone, not have a normally considered acceptable american lifestyle.


Nope. The parent should work for their welfare dollars. If we need welfare-childcare or subsidized childcare for these parents, so be it. Atleast we would be getting some work for our money and would not incentivize non-work.

[Osborn F. Enready]

I agree with your stated positions Truth and Power.

[Wndrtch]

I agree with your stated positions Truth and Power.


+1!

[apdst]

that depends on the person, many would rather work then be stuck taking care of a new baby every other year.

Then, maybe, she should stop getting knocked up?

[Alonzo]

So the kids should starve, be left home alone, not have a normally considered acceptable american lifestyle.


Nope. The parent should work for their welfare dollars. If we need welfare-childcare or subsidized childcare for these parents, so be it. Atleast we would be getting some work for our money and would not incentivize non-work.


Free child care would be the best solution, and if the parent wants a more expensive child care provider he or she could pay the difference.

A cousin of mine stayed on welfare for years because she couldn't afford quality day care, and the lower quality care she could pay for essentially meant she took home just as much working as she did staying home. And if she stayed home her kid actually got quality care.

[potter]

What is the excuse for this? In the great depression they gave people jobs in public service when they couldn't find work. In today's society, the only excuse for not finding work is not looking, not trying, or continually losing the jobs you do get. Why should we support someone who refuses to support themself?


I think too many people these days feel entitled to a free ride. Odd that the majority of the "cases" I'm familiar with are current and former government employees. I know several that have used every excuse in the book to get on disability...and they seem to succeed.....

These people otherwise carry on normal lives drinking and having fun....buying nice new cars and homes with their checks....

They make me sick....

I know of no one who is on welfare though.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

So what, the kids should starve, be left home alone, not have a normally considered acceptable american lifestyle because their mother can't make enough to properly support them.

So Government should be their provider?
O.K. Then allow Government to give them tubule ligation so they can
not produce more state dependant citizens !

It's the parents responsibility and obligation to give their child
the best life possible ! I they can't provide a good life maybe they
should not have offspring ! They are responsible not the rest
of the Taxpayers !!!!

[Alonzo]

It's the parents responsibility and obligation to give their child
the best life possible ! I they can't provide a good life maybe they
should not have offspring ! They are responsible not the rest
of the Taxpayers !!!!

Pay for them now, or pay for them later when they're in prison, using emergency rooms due to not being able to afford health care (which is a huge burden to the tax payer), or all the tax money they may have otherwise been able to provide if they had a better start.

You can make all these justifications of how it's not my responsibility, do it yourself etc. but it's meaningless. At the end of the day what matters is the well being of the population, and people being a burden to the state and the tax payers seriously harms that.

[ScareCrow]

I know a lady who is a high school drop out. She has most of her rent paid by section 8 leaving her to pay only $50 a month for a 3 bedroom house. Her utilities are not much but she gets assistance from the government to make sure her water, gas, and electric don't get shut off and sometimes even has her bill paid by the local trustee. She pays less for her telephone service than I do because of some government instituted program that helps pay for phone service. When her or her children are sick she doesn't have to worry about the bill because Medicaid pays their medical expenses and she doesn't have to pay $65 a week for that insurance for her family like I do for mine. She gets free milk, cereal, eggs, cheese and other foods from the WIC program and still gets over $400 a month in food stamps on top of that. With all the help mentioned above this lady is still allowed to work a part time job without loosing that help. She even gets her childcare paid for by the state through a program for the poor so she doesn't have to pay a dime for her kids to go to daycare. The restaurant she works at actually offered her a promotion with higher pay and better hours and she refused it because she would loose a lot of her help and it would turn out to be a pay cut for her in the long run.

This lady I know is one of my cousins and I am appalled at the way she is able to abuse the system. I work my ass off for what I have and yet she has many things I know I can't afford(like that nice new big screen HD TV that she got with her tax check.) I'm all for helping out those in need but seriously believe the current system is beyond corrupted. You don't hear too many conservatives arguing against government grants and loans for college because it's a hand up not a hand out. That is what I believe is wrong with the current system, it does encourage many people to stay in the system. If my cousin wants to continue to receive any help I believe she should have to get her GED, maybe go to college, receive training that will help her in landing a better job, and be worked in a system that rewards those who work their way out of the system. That is something I wouldn't mind my tax dollars going towards.

[lily]

Scarecrow.........I don't want to start an argument, but then aren't you also contributing to the problem? You know she's scamming, you seem upset, but don't want to turn her in.

With that said, if I'm not mistaken, welfare is decided state by state. If you don't like the amount, the way it's handled, then work to change it in your state. That's one solution.........the other would be to use some of those welfare dollars, find the fathers of these children who left them with the mother, to have to get on welfare to support them and force them to pay for child support.

[Truth_and_Power]

I think "a reasonable american lifestyle" has been scaled up way way too much. When my parents were growing up, they were thrilled that the family had a car and a single small TV. Now if you can't get a new flat panel TV and a big ass car for each family member it's like your kids are going to grow up stupid because of it. No, the kids are growing up stupid because your fat lazy ass is watching TV and drinking beer all day. People used to get by with very little, and if you are so poor that the government is going to have to pay for your kids' healthcare, you don't need a new tv, you dont need more than 1 (0 if you're urban) car, and you damn sure don't need beer. When I was putting myself through college I sold my car and took the bus because I could not afford to keep fixing it because i was trying to work and go to school at the same time. Not counting the walking I did during my shifts as a waiter, I walked 5-8 miles a day, plus a couple of bus rides to get to work and school. I'd like to hear of even ONE welfare case that works as hard as I did and made the sacrifices that I did. And I still managed to party with my friends and have a good times despite all that. Imagine what I could have done if I was really desperate!

[Cobra]

She sin't scamming, she qualifies according to the rules from all he's said. Just because you do things you know will keep you qualified doesn't mean your scamming.

[potter]

I think "a reasonable american lifestyle" has been scaled up way way too much. When my parents were growing up, they were thrilled that the family had a car and a single small TV. Now if you can't get a new flat panel TV and a big ass car for each family member it's like your kids are going to grow up stupid because of it. No, the kids are growing up stupid because your fat lazy ass is watching TV and drinking beer all day. People used to get by with very little, and if you are so poor that the government is going to have to pay for your kids' healthcare, you don't need a new tv, you dont need more than 1 (0 if you're urban) car, and you damn sure don't need beer. When I was putting myself through college I sold my car and took the bus because I could not afford to keep fixing it because i was trying to work and go to school at the same time. Not counting the walking I did during my shifts as a waiter, I walked 5-8 miles a day, plus a couple of bus rides to get to work and school. I'd like to hear of even ONE welfare case that works as hard as I did and made the sacrifices that I did. And I still managed to party with my friends and have a good times despite all that. Imagine what I could have done if I was really desperate!


I was hoping someone would touch on this. :thumbsup:

[ScareCrow]

Scarecrow.........I don't want to start an argument, but then aren't you also contributing to the problem? You know she's scamming, you seem upset, but don't want to turn her in.

With that said, if I'm not mistaken, welfare is decided state by state. If you don't like the amount, the way it's handled, then work to change it in your state. That's one solution.........the other would be to use some of those welfare dollars, find the fathers of these children who left them with the mother, to have to get on welfare to support them and force them to pay for child support.


Lily, don't ever worry about starting an argument with me. I'm probably the most laid back person you have ever met. I love constructive criticism and greatly enjoy other views, which is what makes me so successful in my job.

With that said, she's not doing anything illegal that I could report her for. Indiana is a fairly conservative state, I would hate to see what it's like in Massachusetts. As far as fathers being found to pay support, I agree with that 100%. With two children of my own I can't imagine being a deadbeat dad like many are, my kids are my life and the reason I have for working so hard.

[4Reaganomics]

Lily, given that you were intrigued by the prior article I posted on the war on poverty and its failure and inefficiency, I decided to give you a few more links to appeal to your curiousity.

Others, feel free to read them as well, yes you have my permission.

http://www.worldandi.com/specialreport/1995/september/Sa14045.htm

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16860

The original for those who haven't read it yet
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Religion/EM364.cfm

and a book worth looking into for those who are unaware of the situation
http://www.amazon.com/Americas-Failed-5-4-Trillion-Poverty/dp/0891950621

[lily]

Reagan.......thanks for the links........but if it ever comes down to me having to read a book on economics to post here, then my days are numberd.;)

[Go Fish]

A woman with young kids. If it would cost so much for daycare that she could make more staying home with them on welfare it's prolly the better idea. Why work your ass off at a job not to bring hardly any of it home.


Why not just take up whoring? Hell, it pays far better than JUST Welfare, and damned if it's not in vogue these days.
Come on Welfare Queens! Get off those big, doughy asses and let somebody else get on 'em!
All an education's going to get you is a damned job, and who in their right mizz-ind wants one of THOSE things?

[Cobra]

get you is a damned job, and who in their right mizz-ind wants one of THOSE things?
I don't know, not me that's for damn sure. I also don't wana pay taxes or do house chores or have police around but that's how it goes sometimes. You just have to make the best decisions for you. It's not the people on welfares fault, it's the systems if it's abused.

[Go Fish]

Well, scumbags will figure out how to game any hand-out program. Back in the day we had contracts for some properties in the ghetto, and all those kids would ever seem to be eating was junk food. Why people would want to keep their children on the dole, unhealthy and unmotivated is beyond me. Perpetuating dependency and sloth is criminal, and bringing up a child to believe that the best he or she can ever hope for is a shithole apartment in a warzone and a government check is downright inhuman.

[Keith Hamburger]

As to the daycare issue, why don't we have some of those people on welfare provide daycare to others to earn their checks? Might take some training but that's better than giving everyone a free ride.

Keith

[Scribbler1]

That's workfare, and in this case it's a practical solution.

So why do we keep electing people who don't see that? It's not OUR fault there's welfare fraud.

[Go Fish]

That's workfare, and in this case it's a practical solution.

So why do we keep electing people who don't see that? It's not OUR fault there's welfare fraud.


Regardless the benefits built into any system like this, there's going to be fraud. It's the way some people view life.

[Scribbler1]

That's workfare, and in this case it's a practical solution.

So why do we keep electing people who don't see that? It's not OUR fault there's welfare fraud.


Regardless the benefits built into any system like this, there's going to be fraud. It's the way some people view life.
You are absolutely right. My point is where are the "leaders" who KNOW of these abuses and do nothing about it?
There are fellow citizens who need some help at times for various legitimate reasons, but the cheats make them ALL look bad. And personally, while I'm supportive of help when it is needed, I don't want the bums ripping off the system on my dime.

But *I* can't stop it. Only our lawmakers can.
And, come to think of it, THEY don't deserve THEIR checks either.

[Go Fish]

Nor their protracted vacations, or their cars, or any of the perks.

[Mia]

Talk about bums. They mooch off of our hard work!

[Sublimating]

What is the excuse for this? In the great depression they gave people jobs in public service when they couldn't find work. In today's society, the only excuse for not finding work is not looking, not trying, or continually losing the jobs you do get. Why should we support someone who refuses to support themself?


The program is called afdc it stands for aid for families with dependent children.
Unlike many conservatives, society's resolve to insure that children have food to eat trumps its desire to discourage government dependence. Can we turn our backs on the children of our society?

We should support them because the alternative is supporting the child. Trust me if it's your tax dollars that your worried about, the cost of the state raising a child is a lot more than the welfare check the family gets, not to mention the fact that most kids in custody of the state turn out horribly.

[Keith Hamburger]

Of course, just like most increases in government, whether confiscation of the fruits of our labor or reduction in our freedoms, it must be done "for the children".

The "for the children" argument is so often so full of crap that I think it's time to completely ignore it.

Keith

[Scribbler1]

You know that's not going to happen. As a society we are quite protective of our children and the minute we say we don't care about them you're going to see problems.
They might like to sell children and have them work at 6 years-old in some other countries, but that's NOT us and it shows a lack of forethought to even consider it.

[Mayberry]

South Texas is fraught with welfare abuse. People go to the grocery store and buy steak and shrimp on their Lone Star card (foodstamps) while I eat beans 'n' weenies. They load their groceries (that I bought) into their Escalade with 22 inch spinning wheels and stereos that'll make you deaf. Meanwhile I'm driving a 26 year old Jeep with no radio!! Then they drive their 5 kids from 5 different daddies to their section 8 house that they pay very little for, while I have an $880 mortgage payment. I've busted my butt my entire life, and these people do little to nothing. They have HBO, I don't. They have satellite TV, I don't. They pay nothing for healthcare. I pay through the nose. Their kids' mouths are full of chrome because they drink Dr. Pepper from a baby bottle or a sippy cup!!! My kids drink water or milk, Cokes are a treat! But there lies the difference. I pay my way and therefore I urge my kids to be healthy so that I don't have doctor or dental bills. Welfare cases don't care, because it doesn't cost them anything. Oh, and I've taken down the license numbers of those Escalades and reported them to the welfare people. Those same Escalades are still loaded up every week with steak and shrimp on my nickle. Even worse, I see them doing their grocery shopping at convenience stores! Who cares what it costs? They're not paying for it!!! :fight:

[Pookie]

That is infuriating. I know a couple who wanted a Habitat For Humanity house, so the wife quit her job so they could be poor enough to qualify for it.
And these people are the first ones to bitch and complain about the system, yet they don't vote. Geez.
Sorry, I'd rather work and pay my own way.
Purrs,
Pookie

[davo]

I have no problem with people getting the dole when they're temporarily out of work, so they have the bare essentials to stay afloat and look for another job without resorting to crime. In Australia we've had a 'work for the dole' scheme where you do volunteer work to receive the dole. You must also have applied for a few jobs every week.

I don't think having no welfare whatsoever is a credible option, as the economic and social costs of crime from having no welfare would far exceed the cost of welfare checks. Its would also really suck if your factory closed down and lost your job, but had to steal to survive and that prevented you from getting another job. Maybe the US could adopt a model similar to what John Howard introduced in Australia?

[Keith Hamburger]

I have no problem with people getting the dole when they're temporarily out of work, so they have the bare essentials to stay afloat and look for another job without resorting to crime. In Australia we've had a 'work for the dole' scheme where you do volunteer work to receive the dole. You must also have applied for a few jobs every week.

I don't think having no welfare whatsoever is a credible option, as the economic and social costs of crime from having no welfare would far exceed the cost of welfare checks. Its would also really suck if your factory closed down and lost your job, but had to steal to survive and that prevented you from getting another job. Maybe the US could adopt a model similar to what John Howard introduced in Australia?

We have that in the US as well, without the work requirement but with the application requirement. It's called unemployment insurance. That is funded by a tax (usually called a fee but we know how that is) on employers for all of their employees. If someone loses a job through no fault of their own they can claim for several months on this program.

Even being a libertarian I have, and currently am, receiving money from this program. It may seem a bit hypocritical but I feel that I would expect an employer to provide some similar cushion if it weren't mandated by the government. I don't like the mandate point but it is a reasonable program in most regards. It is time limited and not funded through direct tax revenues.

This is very different from what is known as welfare. Welfare often goes to those that have never worked, and many never expect to work. It, intentionally or not, serves to weaken a father's responsibilities to his family and often breaks up families because a mother can get money from the government if the family income is low enough. Welfare often ends up being a program that families will stay on for generations.

Two very different programs with very different results.

And, of course, in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave, we have both.

Keith

[SouthernLadyGA]

Should women already on welfare be allowed to have more children?

[AnnEsthesia]

WHat are you going to do? Forcible sterilization?

[Scribbler1]

Although it was shot down, there was a push some years back to have welfare mothers use Norplant, a form of birth control that was implanted under the skin. When it was removed, after the woman is off welfare, she could still have children.

It's invasive, but I don't think there is any other way to do it, especially when the system allows you to receive more money when you have dependent children.

[AnnEsthesia]

And what about the men? Are we going to chemically castrate them too?

[SouthernLadyGA]

Why are people having children when they cannot support themselves? We have FREE BIRTHCONTROL.....abortion is legal....adoption is another option.

[AnnEsthesia]

lmfao... so you want poor people to get abortions? or be forced to give up their kids? and where can I get this free birth control. I have to pay out of pocket for mine, and it is mighty expensive.

Oh... and not everyone on welfare started out that way. If someone is disabled, that does not automatically mean they should never procreate again.

[Scribbler1]

And what about the men? Are we going to chemically castrate them too?
That's an excellent point, but one that has no easy answer, apparently. The only (partial) solution that comes to mind is to make the father financially obligated to pay his share and make it stick. No extra money for a child except in unusual circumstances. If he is also on welfare then he could be given a different form of punishment, such as groundskeeping at a public park for six months or picking up trash at a public beach for no pay. In that case, it's a lot easier to just pick up a pack of rubbers, which we can even provide free.

[AnnEsthesia]

So you think denying a woman the right to have kids is the same as making a man pick up trash in the park?

[Scribbler1]

So you think denying a woman the right to have kids is the same as making a man pick up trash in the park?
Of COURSE it isn't the same. I did say there was no easy answer and my idea was only a partial solution. But at least it's SOMETHING, which beats nothing every time.

[SouthernLadyGA]

Child bearing may be a woman's right but it also HER responsibility to provide adequate food, shelter, love, and a healthy stable life to her offspring! If she cannot provide these essentials then she should be woman enough to give up her RIGHT to have children.

Yes men who go around fathering children with no regard to their upbringing should be permanently sterilized!

[Pookie]

Yep, but I think the idea of permanently sterilizing men would go over like a fart in church. It would make so much sense to use birth control if you don't want or need any more children.
But you can lead a horse to water...

[Fishingriver]

Exxon is able bodied but we have billions in welfare going to them. I don't see the right wing nuts complaining. It isn't really about how the money is spent to them. Its that someone else gets help. There is so little welfare left that it is ridiculous to even worry about it. The only welfare we are "carrying" is to big business. The Fed just demonstrated that.

[potter]

So you think denying a woman the right to have kids is the same as making a man pick up trash in the park?

I don't care how many kids a woman has as long as she has a plan to support them. Can't support them? Don't breed. (Listening guys?)

Their right to have a child stops right where my right to not support them begins.

[moevan]

So what, the kids should starve, be left home alone, not have a normally considered acceptable american lifestyle because their mother can't make enough to properly support them.

... no , create a job called " child care" I'd rather pay for 50% of the walfare mothers than 100% of them . 1/2 of them provide child care for the ones cleaning up the city , then switch.......problem solved. society / government will pay for some to watch the chillins of the ones working , while they're working.....painting curbs , cutting grass , cleaning litter , painting buildings and bridges , that way the chillins are safe and secure and being WELL taken care of while the other oners earns a livin. a2weeks later...they'z can switch it up. and de udder wons can be doin what udder aint duin allalongwhile dats ones doin what dis ones abin doin da lass time up.it's called......equality. I'll be doin what you be doin when I aint doin what you'd be doin if i aint doin what you'd be doin anyhow. but seriously......during the great depression.....people would be proud to paint curbs to provide for their families especially knowing that their young ones were being taken care of by like minded folk.

[PostmodernProphet]

Scarecrow.........I don't want to start an argument, but then aren't you also contributing to the problem? You know she's scamming, you seem upset, but don't want to turn her in.



Lily, I have several clients who manage government subsidized housing projects, as such they are required by law to report evidence of abuse of the system to HUD for action....I can give you an example from both ends of the spectrum on government action.....

In one situation it was discovered that a woman who was receiving assistance in the form of a full rental subsidy plus a $300 monthly check for utilities was misrepresenting her employment status and was actually employed full time......HUD took action on that report....after nine months.....that was the success story.....

on the other side, a client took over management of a second apartment complex in a town about twenty miles away and discovered that a tenant who was receiving a subsidized apartment here was also receiving a subsidized apartment in the other complex.....in response to the report, HUD's reply was that they didn't have sufficient manpower to investigate......

Dealing with single women who receive a fully subsidized apartment based on their income who have "friends visiting" (which is the typical way of describing a fully employed male who visits the apartment from 6pm until 7am seven days a week) is almost a weekly occurrence in my office......