English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

that maybe force the able-bodied to get out there and start fending for themselves?

2006-11-21 10:22:37 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Government

14 answers

workfare is a great thing. If I have to work to make ends meet, then EVERY able bodied person should have to.

2006-11-21 11:45:52 · answer #1 · answered by timmy2505 2 · 0 0

Yes, it might. But, there will always be people looking for hand-outs. I run into those types of people every day.

But, look at it this way, if we were to cut back on social programs drastically, we wouldn't have the illegal alien problem that we have now. Because of those jobs that they currently have, will no longer be available to them. Now this is a great idea. BUT IT WILL NOT WORK! PERIOD!

Why do I say this? Well, those illegals that I have mentioned, work very hard for their money. They normally work anywhere from 8 to 16 hours a day; 7 days a week. Now, HOW many able-bodied Americans will do that? Not very many. This is because we Americans are very lazy, want something for nothing, generally think we are better than everyone else on this planet, and we think we are very special.

See what I mean!

2006-11-21 10:43:00 · answer #2 · answered by dakotaviper 7 · 0 0

There is a difference between social programs and welfare. Perhaps your solution would help cut welfare to able-bodied people but social programs would mean cutting out after school programs such as tutoring, sports also meals on wheels for seniors, food pantries for homeless people, and emergency health care. You have to give a little when a government has so much for themselves.

2006-11-21 11:06:52 · answer #3 · answered by madisonian51 4 · 0 0

Reagan cut back drastically on social programs....

We didn't have a homeless problem before that time.

There were homeless but few and far between. Of course, there was a time when we thought throwing the trash out meant: Out the window of your car into the gutter.

2006-11-21 10:29:41 · answer #4 · answered by ggraves1724 7 · 0 0

Obviously those who can't work will just suffer more and more, is that a problem for you?

Sure the able-bodied ones may choose to look for min wage jobs, or they may choose instead to start fending for themselves by mugging and assaulting you. Even if you happen to avoid being the victim of crime, your taxes will probably go up by much more to pay for their incaceration and increased police presence.

There are selfish reasons to support social welfare programs, since selfish reasons seem to be all republicans understand.

2006-11-21 10:25:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Yes, eventually, it would. It needs to happen. In lieu of simply eliminating public assistance, states could even begin to offer contracting services, utilizing people who apply for public assistance, to do jobs which require minimal training, or training that can be learned on the job, rather than just handing out checks. If prisoners can be put to work, so can everybody else--and they can also learn skills that will allow them to support themselves in the future.

There will always be a need to help out people who are genuinely in need, and I don't believe a forward-thinking society will ever be willing to eliminate assistance programs altogether. But, as they exist in the US now, they are greatly abused, by people who have learned how to manipulate the system. A major overhaul is in order.

2006-11-21 10:55:57 · answer #6 · answered by functionary01 4 · 0 1

Yes, we need to cut the welfare programs out all together. its not the governments job to provide care of the people its their job to make sure every one has the right to work. those that cant work should turn to their families and if the have no family then the church would gladly provide. but as long as the government CAN steal your money they will.

2006-11-21 10:35:59 · answer #7 · answered by spiveyracing 5 · 0 0

Yes, many who are on social programs would be forced to work harder and get jobs. But there are many who might be unable to work, or provide for their kids who might get hurt, or worse, their kids might get hurt. Social Programs are very hard because you have to balance providing for those who truly need help and not allowing people to abuse them. But if you can figure out how to make social programs impossible to abuse, yet still provide help for those who need/deserve it, then you are smarter then everyone who has tried before you.

2006-11-21 10:27:40 · answer #8 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 0 0

Both Reagan and Clinton worked on welfare reform.

Sure would be nice if you actually were accurate about the stuff you post.....try some actual research then come back and ask a sensible question.

2006-11-21 10:33:04 · answer #9 · answered by kissmybum 4 · 0 0

Possibly. It might also put hordes of mentally and emotionally disturbed and physically disabled in our streets, keep education and medication from those who need it most and cause the crime rate to skyrocket.

2006-11-21 10:28:20 · answer #10 · answered by socrates 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers