Serious question about welfare, serious answers please?

Question

Now before you jump on me for being a heartless miser, consider this: I was raised on foodstamps myself as a child, and I work in an industry that deals with it daily.
Now believe it or not, most of us want the same thing -- we want hungry people fed, and wish for everyone to have a place to live and chance to improve. The difference is the way we go about this. I disagree with the welfare system for these reasons...
I distrust our government to efficently spend money. Look at the stand-up job they do funding everything else.
I see a lot of people who need it that can't get it, and a lot of people who have it waste it.
I think the rules are too lax about what you can buy. Soda, doritos, doughnuts, designer birthday cakes -- these should not be bought with tax dollars.
and other reasons.
the point is, I think welfare/foodstamp system should be reformed.
if you like it the way it is, tell me why. if you wish to see it change, help me offer alternatives.

so now I'm lying about my childhood? and I suppose the other people are lying about their experiences too?

yeah man, I see designer cakes paid for with FS on a daily basis, tell me every one is a sob story. I know there are always extreme examples, but that doesn't justify everyone else. and as for the clerk making a rude comment....I'm not allowed to do that, or I'd get fired.

Answer 1

I just got off welfare/foodstamps after being on them for a year. I agree with them being lax with what you can buy foodwise, but I think the thing that irritated me the most is that they gave me $400 for food, which I didn't need, and $297 to live on for the entire month. Anyone that has bills knows that $297 isn't going to make it. They say you can go to jail for selling food stamps, (mine were on a card), but I don't see how you can survive and get necessities for the house (toilet paper, etc..) without doing so.

I will admit, I ate better when on food stamps than I have in the 10 years since I quit living with my parents. The problem is how good can a steak taste when you can't buy the charcoal to cook it on, the dish soap to wash your dishes, or shoes for your child that is outgrowing them every 2 months?

I was using all my money for utilties because no business in my area that paid people's bills ever had money for the coming month to help, and the waiting lists were long. I couldn't buy my son's school supplies, and we had to ask the school to not say anything about my son getting free meals as the children that did were teased mercilessly for being poor.

It sounds like you work in a grocery store, I see many people in them doing just what you describe- cakes, steaks, fancy dinners, and using their welfare cash for cigarettes and alcohol. I wish they would find some way to let me go to Wal-Mart and buy things I need like soap, clothes, little things I need every day. When the money is gone on bills and you're trying to explain to your son why we can't do that cause Mommy is poor it breaks your heart.

I also think that Dan makes many good points and I wish it could work.

Answer 2

The best program is a job...Make tax payers out of tax recipients.

We, the poeple who live and work on Long Island, NY, know this for a fact. Here's why...

I had put together a plan to build and operate a Suffolk County racetrack for thoroughbreds and satandardbreds. The racetrack would be owned and maintained by Suffolk County.

Thousands of jobs would be created on and off of the racetrack and have people work, instead of being on welfare. The potential for almost a billion dollars per year would go directly into the coffers of Suffolk County and reduce the taxes.

The project is known and is widely accepted with people signing petitions and writing letters and making terlephone calls, etc. And, yet the project to build and operate a rcaetrack has undergone character assassination and ridicule.

When the matter was looked into, we had found some very powerful influences, oustide of the elective government that we vote for, has bought and paid off our Suffolk County Legislators to make certain this project goes nowhere.

Jobs, jobs and more jobs would be created and there would be a sharp reduction in the taxes by having people work and become tax payers and not tax recipients, who would then choose a medical program they would pay for instead of being medicaid/medicare recipients.

When we talk about the taxes, we should not be talking about the taxes from the bottom up. We should be talking about ways to balance the budget, which may include taxes, but, not be specifically geared toward taxes as being the only solution.

Projects and jobs must be factored into the discussion to reduce the tax burden and the ability for people to not seek food stamps and welfare.

I have never met anyone who was proud to be on welfare. Everyone I ever met hoped and wished for a job. And, don't believe that crap about how people hang out all day and drink beer and collect welfare because they are happy about getting over on everyone. That is pure garbage.

Answer 3

Personally - I think the system needs reform. People with jobs and income sometimes don't need as much to supplement what they have, and those who have a federally justified reason have the states allocating the rest of the funds questioning it, and if they don't know the system - they might get denied. Say a person has a social security income, well below poverty, which comes from the federal level, and the states all receive the money for things like food stamps, state health insurance, cash assistance, and so on from the federal government to spend as they see fit. When a person on social security has a difficult time and has to appeal a decision made by the state on the part they are allocated - well below what makes surviving possible easily - and are denied other portions, then perhaps, the system is in need of an overhaul.

Answer 4

I am a social democrat, and have long advocated and strongly believed in the push to truly make these United States a true welfare state. One of the best examples in my opinion is that which Sweden has set; rather than explain all of what is so great about Sweden, I'll let you look that up yourself, as simply presenting you information won't do anything to shape your opinion. However, I can lay out mine for you, thus:

1) Taxes should be weighted, directly proportional to annual income, with 50% of the revenue of taxes received from those making over $300,000 annually going toward a new welfare program.
2) Anyone making less than $25,000 annually should be exempt from income taxes. This is living off the bare necessisties, and the government can manage without that; furthermore, when one makes less than that some, the percentage going to income tax is rather large for that individual, but nominally small for the government.
3) Anyone making less than $50,000 annually may apply for the welfare program that will be established. Funds will be allocated on a monthly basis, once again weighted, with those with the lowest annual incomes receiving proprotionally larger sums monthly.
4) As the general economy of the United States improves, as is inevitable when more currency is in circulation, the welfare application level shall be raised to anyone making less than $60,000. A board will be appointed by the Congress every five years to evalute a raise, if any is necessary, in the level of annual income at which one may no longer apply for welfare. This board will NOT have the authority to lower that level.
5) Social security will include 10% of the income taxes of those making $250,000 or higher annually. This will give a much-needed boost to a failing concept that is indescribably necessary, as medicine begins to provide men and women with ever-longer lives.
I don't want to get into a long rant, but this basically outlines my views.

I hope you agree with me on some aspects, although this really is a personal preference. I feel the crisis of poverty is more pressing than anything else is at the moment, and, if untended to, will ultimately lead to the colapse of the American social system. This is no exaggeration.

I hope this helps a bit, and wish you all the best! If you have any comments or questions, or simply wish to discuss anything, I would be glad to receive an email from you at [e-mail].

Answer 5

I'd like to see the max income requirement raised as well as the max ASSET level . In rural areas, families often have more than one vehicle. It's necessary to getting around. Most states have some sort of welfare to work program that requires you to look for work, work or volunteer in combination for 40 hours a week. I don't know of any business that provides 40 hrs. anymore. Most of these programs will help you get a GED but that is all. These days you can't wash dishes on that. Some will help you with a trade for 1 yr. How many beauticians and phlebotomists do we need? Anyway, many of these programs will sanction the entire grant/food stamps if you can't meet program requirements. Before you start judging people, get your facts straight and be sure you know what you're talking about. What is so wrong about buying a child a fancy cake on their birthday? You are heartless and no, you weren't raised on food stamps. And before you say people on welfare don't pay taxes.. they pay cash for anything that is not a food item, pay property taxes (included in rent) utility bills, etc.

Answer 6

This is a really great question because it involves a topic that so many people have strong feelings about. Even better, the strong feelings may come from all types of concerns: the role of government, the social impact of a welfare system, what standards should be established for distributing aid, etc. And of course there are always those colorful folks who will see everything with a "conservative" or "liberal" formula.

Here is something to think about: who are you to say someone deserves public assistance and another person doesn't. What I mean is, people seem to assume that along with a welfare system there must be some way to differentiate between those who deserve assistance and those who don't. This person deserves welfare because they are trying to find a job but this other person doesn't because she is a drug addict, etc. In this way welfare is evil because it is a government-sponsored system that devalues certain people's humanity based on other people's standards. Now, it is o.k. if you and I discriminate against others because we disapprove of their conduct but since when is the government, which represents everybody, allowed to do this?

On the other hand, it is simply inhuman to do nothing and let other people suffer when you have the ability to help them.

For these reasons it seems to me that the only legitimate welfare system is one that distributes the available resources simply on the basis of need, without regard for your, or my, values about who "deserves it."

Either that or "faith-based" initiatives that distribute resources only to people who believe in God. (Joking sarcasm)

Answer 7

It needs major reform and a complete overhaul. I have known people on welfare and they are pretty much penalized for trying to get off of it. A lot of these people on it will have a drop in standard of living if they try to get a job at a fast food resteraunt. Imagine losing medicaid just because you get a minimum wage job, losing HUD, there are several reasons why getting off welfare is detremental to the ones on it.

Pretty much the way it is set up now is to keep people poor and that is not what it was meant to be. I think graduated payments are the solution to get people off of it. It should not be all or nothing, it should be all, some, then nothing when you no longer need it.

I also think people who abuse it should lose it, I work for an ambulance and you would be surprised on the people who will call us as a taxi. They say they have a certain illness and have to go to a certain hospital, then when they get there sign out AMA and go to where they really wanted to go to begin with. All done on tax payer expense.

Answer 8

These things are usually cheaper then fruits and vegetables in certain neighborhoods.

They should offer discounts for real food especially for welfare people.

But one story always stuck in my mind.

A woman found out her child had cancer she lost her job taken care of the child the father was working to pay medical bills. They lost everything and when the daughter was deemed incurable they decided to buy her a final birthday cake.

This cake was expensive and she paid with the food stamps that she had, the cashier said what a waste I can't afford this cake but you can.

The woman said nothing because how are you going to explain that your child is dying and this is her last birthday.

2 months after the kids birthday she died and the family took a long time to get off welfare. They never got back on.

This was a true story featured in 20/20 years ago.

Who the hell are you to deny a designer cake when you have no idea how people struggle?

Answer 9

I think that federal transfer payments (that's government-speak for taking money from A and giving it to B, without B doing anything to deserve it) are unconstitutional. I've looked, several times. It isn't there.

Amendment X says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

That means if you can't find where in the constitution says the Federal Government can do something, it can't. So taking money from A and giving it to B is Unconstitutional.

I don't care if A is a giant corporation or small business or farmer or truck driver or senior citizen or starving baby. I don't care if B is a giant corporation or small business or farmer or truck driver or senior citizen or starving baby. YOU CAN'T DO IT constitutionally.

ALL federal transfer payments must go.

If a state wants to do it, and their constitution allows it, and they raise the money without the Feds chipping in, then fine, do it.

If you want to raise a couple of billion bucks and do it, I might chip in to help.

By the way, I know how SCOTUS says it is constitutional. Maybe I'll ask that question later. If you don't know you will be amazed.

Answer 10

i think people who can work, should work. I have never been on any kind of assistance. I come from a generation of Postal Workers ,so we always had more than enough. I am not heartless either, but I am tired of my tax money going to lazy people.I make good money working for the US Postal Service ,just as my mother did, and I cant come close to filling the fridge to full capacity. These people on welfare are filling their fridges up to the brim for free. Where does that leave us hardworking people? No where!! Not Fair, it seems like , they get more benefits, i am constantly told"YOu make too much money,So if my family is lacking , what are we supposed to do? work and save, That's what we are doing, God willing we'll never need assistance. but if we ever do, it won't be in the form of Government Assistance.