Democratic President Bill Clinton ended “welfare as we know it” in 1996, dismantling 60 years of New Deal legislation obliging the government to assist the poor. No government agency bothered to follow the subsequent (mis)fortunes of the poorest Americans suddenly released from their “cycle of dependency.”
Many, if not all, have not rien out of poverty as expected. Welfare reform is a failure that only punished the poor and needy and put moeny into the hands of the greedy.
I hope you are happy about this America.
2006-09-08 07:12:43 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
curlycute - I can assure you I have done far more than you on this issue.
2006-09-08 07:22:04 · update #1
smack - you have never seen anyone use food stamps and then load the groceries into thier lexus. You are a total liar and you should be ashamed for making such false accusations. Have fun mopping the floor pal.
2006-09-08 11:32:40 · update #2
A lot of liquid capital that was around in more "liberal" times is not there anymore thanks in part to the Republican-designed fanacial divide.It's harder to get ahead,and its no coincidence that its a LOT more conservative than it was a few decades ago.
Mymadsky-you can get off welfare at $10/hour.
When you go from welfare to a $10/hour job,your income level and standard of living goes DOWN.That is why its hard to fill.
Case in point.Mining jobs.Used to hjave some of the best pay and benefits in the country.Now its $12/hour and no benefits.Why?
Republicans who hold stock in mining,that's why.
The "common man democrat" has been replaced by the Rovian Republican.And rising is harder than it was in the 60s and 70s
Yeah,Deucerider,it DOES suck being them.Too bad you have no
solutions except let America get torn apart by Republican greed.
How "moral".
2006-09-08 07:25:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
i never met someone personally that actually needed to be on welfare ... ive worked in the grocery buisness for 15+ years ..and the most common scene i see for someone on govt assistance is they get about twice as many groceries as i get using stamps and free food certificates ... their housing is typically almost for free ... they could get a job right where i work easily ... but no ... you watch them walk out to their brand new lexus and load the groceries ... imo there is still too much assistance to people ... if you really want to cut to the chase about people that are actually in a poverty situation then you need to look at the system that is lowering everyones standard of living, debasing the value of money, and killing the middle class with interest rates taxes and debt ... that would be the federal reserve system .... giving people assistance is not the answer ... fixing the actual source of the economic woe in this country would be a better idea but nobody understands how it works and is ignorant, therefore they debate issues that have no bearing on what could effect a change.
2006-09-08 14:38:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Another liberal pooh-poohing about a subject - trying to foray their guilt into more widespread guilt in order to make the government throw more money away (into the hands of bureaucrats and policy makers who will formulate big plans that will do nothing but make themselves wealthy...). This is so old and tired - the GOP backed slick Willy into a corner, so he made lemonade for himself out of the lemons they stuck up his butt. He made it sound like this was his idea, and that he was some great reformer - far from it, the GOP congress was going to approve it, and override it if he vetoed it, so he got in front of the parade and made believe that it was all about him...
Like a government agency can really solve a widespread social problem like this - oh boo hoo, let's shovel a couple more billion at it and see what happens. No matter that government social programs mean nothing and accomplish less (except if you are a mid level bureaucrat in need of a new SUV or Hummer...) - if you create a social program, then the liberals can go sleepy at night pretending that they did something worthwhile... Oh good for you.
Cut taxes and let the people who earn the money put it back into the economy - then these people will be able to get good paying jobs so that they don't need welfare. But no, the liberals have to be in charge of trying to redistribute wealth - when all they want to do is create more government jobs.
2006-09-08 14:38:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's people with attitudes like yours that made welfare such a problem in the firsts place. "Give me more for less". If we keep giving everyone a paycheck for sitting an their a*s and don't give them any reason to go work and take care of themselves which a good portion of them are fully capable of doing, they are just going to continue to expect something for nothing. I know many of these people really need help because they honestly can't help themselves but just as many take it because they can. Many of these people's "cycle of dependency" is often a life time and it shouldn't be. By the way, I'm not defending Bill Clinton or any democrat. They are the ones that think everyone needs the government to rule their lives.
2006-09-08 14:25:36 · answer #4 · answered by Jeremy 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
People get tired of seeing their hard-earned dollars being sucked from their wallets to be used in inefficient or ineffective government programs.
Doesn't matter if it is welfare, wasteful military spending (aircraft/ships/tanks even the military doesn't want), pork-barrel projects (bridges to barely-inhabited remote Alaskan islands), or subsidies for Viagra but not birth control, etc. etc. etc.
A nation that cannot take care of the poorest of its poor - elderly and children - does not deserve to be called a great nation.
A government that permits good paying jobs to be exported overseas to countries that don't care one whit about balanced two-way trade, or even international support on critical global issues (Iraq, N Korea), should not be remain in power.
We are in a race to the bottom, watching other countries take over our manufacturing & production base. Amazing how much the US spends on its military budget to keep sea lanes and air routes safe and open for in-bound trade - all those cargo ships and oil-tankers come to our ports full with their cargo, but depart mostly empty.
The empty promise of materialism. But ya gotta love the low prices at Wal-Mart!
Sign me,
Just slightly cynical
2006-09-08 14:40:09 · answer #5 · answered by Tom-SJ 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Shut up and go to work...I have 150 job openings starting at $10 an hour that I can not get filled. Check the want ads in your local area for entry level positions. In Miami there are no less than 5 pages full of these types of positions.
The reason for failure is NOT Clinton's fault.
It is a shame out educational system is still not equal for all though...this I admit.
2006-09-08 14:18:56 · answer #6 · answered by mymadsky 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
OK there is only a given amount of money.
After the Plutocrats get their share the rest of America gets as you say $7,800 bucks.
So whats your problem
Go big Red Go
2006-09-08 14:21:38 · answer #7 · answered by 43 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
And to think that the USA has 12 million illegal immigrants working here . Why, we could have given those jobs to welfare moms.
2006-09-08 14:35:59 · answer #8 · answered by Dr. D 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
And! What? Since you're so disappointed by this tragedy, what can you as an American citizen do about it? Don't talk about it! Be about it! Help America out since you so concerned. Throw your hat in the ring politically. We'll vote for you!
Enlighten us on that!
2006-09-08 14:17:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because, most of them won't get off their lazy backsides and do an honest days work. Having children when they have no way of supporting them! That is selfish!
Besides, some of them make a better living off welfare than they would working.
2006-09-08 14:33:14 · answer #10 · answered by Linn E 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋