Does anyone else think welfare is stupid?

Question

I dont hink that we should have to pay for bums to survive year after year. i think taht we should gve them a set amount of time and money to find a job, and if they dont have one by then, we should withdraw our funds. i mean, i can understand those that are sick or have a disability, but hose that are just to lazy to work shouldnt get to live of our money. does anyone else agree?

Answer 1

they do that in california..give a date to find gainfull employment..will assist if job is low paying, but they gota find some kind of work!

Answer 2

I understand that welfare seems stupid to the average person paying into it but consider what happens when social welfare nets don't exist e.g. The Great Depression.

For most people welfare is a second chance, you never see these people because their probably busy working or are too ashamed to tell people they need welfare. The people on welfare you do see, however, are often the ones that are actually lazy and don't care about image. It only seems like their are so many people exploiting welfare because the exploiters are the only ones with not enough dignity to care.

In my city, Calgary, there is another issue where a majority (around 70%) of homeless are mildly mentally retarded. Something that we often don't see right away.

My last point is to consider countries without social welfare nets like most of the third world. A common trait many people associate with the third world is a huge gap between the incomes of rich elite and the common poor. The United States however probably has the largest income gap between it poor and super rich in the world and yet the poor in the United States still live like Kings and Queens compared to the third world. This is because the United States has a welfare structure that ensure that everyone enjoys a minimum standard of living. A majority of this is paid for by the middle class and wealthy.

This is not a simply transfer of fund from the rich the to the poor. What happens in practice is that because the poor are ensured a minimum standard of living, everyone is better off because the entire population income shifts upward because the poor are able to contribute to the economy by being able to buy necessary services. This is what occurs in the U.S. If people on welfare were all lazy and addicted to drugs and alcohol, welfare would be a simply transfer of funds from the top to the bottom and the economy would resemble a much poorer nation with a free market economy but no or ineffective welfare like Mexico, most of Latin America, India, the parts of Africa not under the control of a dictator and so on.

Answer 3

Some states already have a system like this but it doesn't work for people with poor health, no job skills and no resources (such as a loving family to help them out). It isn't enough and doesn't take the place of what they need. There are too many people who need disability help that don't get it. And since welfare is extremely limited, you'd be surprised at by both how little people get, and how much it doesn't do. Most welfare doesn't go to bums as you say. Almost all in our country goes to single parents with no help in their personal lives. Where are the people who are supposed to help them? Why do you think they could turn their lives around for a couple hundred dollars a month and unresolved ___ you name it problems? Did you know most welfare goes to foreigners and rich? Time to end the propaganda against the poor.
PS for the idiots still claiming people stay on welfare for years, having multiple children, etc. The government ended that program years ago. NO ONE prospers under welfare. No welfare program in the US is enough to live on or enough to stay on. They no longer give increases. It is cut off after a few months. DUH! where've you been?

Answer 4

Well,
As a welfare recipient myself, I can say this.
Most states now have Project Zero, which allows families to recieve ADC for a combined total of 5 years, after that time frame, they get nothing.

The only exceptions to this are those with a child who is disabled and it has been declared that the parent must care for that child full time, or if the person is disabled and unable to work.

Most welfare programs have a welfare to work program, the recipients must report to this program for 40 hours a week, there they are taught job hunting skills and are given resources such as job training programs, schooling etc that they may need to find a job.

Personally, I myself think people need to worry more about helping to create jobs so that people like me who were laid off when all the Auto factory jobs were shipped over seas, can get back to work where thy want to be rather than having to rely on welfare to live off of until I can finish my education.

But then again, why should we have hard working americans build our vehicles when we can ship them overseas and get twice the work for half the price?

Answer 5

There should be a cut off in how much extra money you get for the number of dependents you have. In the military you get paid a little more if you have a kid or are married, but the amount doen't go up the more kids you have. These people on wellfare just keep having more kids to get more money, and they should all be shot for bringing more stupid people into the world for their own selfish wants. They should get one "raise" for a kid, and then it stays. That would stop them from reproducing so much. (I posted a solution to stopping these kind of people from having kids)

The best thing would be to do just what you said, give them a set amount of time to get a job. Why should they get paid for being lazy?! I know some people who collect welfare and work under the table, and make more than me. Those bastards!

Answer 6

Welfare is just like every other government program: it was a good idea until the government got their hands on it. The current system makes it too easy for people to take advantage and use the money inappropriately. Personally, I think the whole program should be slashed and the funds used to create a more robust unemployment system, with job training for those who are not qualified for any real jobs. This may sound insensitive, but if you aren't physically or mentally capable of providing _anything_ to society, you do not deserve to be supported for your whole life. I would bet that if the free money from the government dried up, a whole lot of 'disabled' people would find things they can do for a paycheck awfully quick.

Answer 7

No. You are the only person ever to form that opinion.

Of course, there are other people who think it is wrong. Some think that the entire system is broken and should be eliminated. Some think the idea is good, but it is too easy to abuse. And some think the system still does more good than harm.

As with any government system, the goal might be valid but the implementation often is very badly managed.

And don't forget that the Constitution, in addition to mandating the federal government to "promote the general Welfare", only literally allows the government to spend money for two things: welfare and defense. See Article I Section 8.

Answer 8

I hate to have to harp but 5year max lifetime cash benefits. When they are gone they are gone so use them wisely.
Food stamps are a commodity ask any accountant he will tell you, "you must first sell the commodity", to make any real money. It is a commodity like tomatoes, lettuce, meat, perishables, that you will throw away when rotten. Americans throw alot of food away already surely you are not suggesting a child go hungry so you can fill the trash can? Yes many addicts sell their stamps. How do we decide which stamps will be sold for drugs and which will buy Johnny his cheerios?
Medical is guaranteed for pregnant woman and children. Pregnant woman need prenatal care for healthy babies, no one likes to see sick new borns. Children need regular checkups. These "poor" kids go to school next to yours God only knows what horrible desease that kid might get living in those conditions.
BY the way to that guy who wants a lot of state ran orphanages remember Hitler?
Lazy is not a word I would call a welfare mom. She works real hard. She lives like a pioneer. She doesn't have a washer and dryer combo. she has a bath tub. She doesn't have a car she has the bus and a cart. She has as many errands as you as many appointments as you and as much to do as you. Lazy no I don't think so. Bad luck, no support, and people who hate. Pity the welfare woman she has her hands full. If she is lucky in 10 to 15 her time will be up and she will be free.
Come on girl I'm rooting for you!

Answer 9

No, I don't think that welfare is stupid in and of itself. I think that the government would allow a person that drives a brand-new car and wears Gucci to live rent-free at taxpayer expense is stupid. Abuse really is few and far between though, and many people do need help. But this shouldn't be a permanent solution at all. People should be out looking for a job if they are able. I've been on government assistance and the feeling of not working drove me nuts.

Answer 10

No, I actually think you are stupid and have led a charmed life. I needed help for about 6 months a couple years ago without which my daughter and I would have been homeless thanks to the ******** abusive a$$hole father of hers. But is meant to be a hand up not a hand out. Until you have had to walk a mile in others' shoes try not to be so judgemental. There are programs in place like welfare to work, where you been hiding? Mommy and daddys money help you out much?

Answer 11

yes yes yes
when welfare is needed it should be given for a time but to many have decided that this is there chosen career path cut the useless eaters off and one of 2 things will happen either they will get a job any job or they will starve to death either way this solves the problem and if there are kids involved take them away not temporarily but for good give them to a hard working responsible family that will give them love and show them the way that life should be not sucking on the government teat