Evaluate proposal for welfare reform?

Question

How do you make recipients want to work for money/food/housing/bills when they are getting these things for free? Major change in the food stamp & cash assistance programs could do the job.

1. The food stamp program should be ran like the WIC program, where only certain foods or brands of foods are acceptable to buy with your checks. Welfare needs to say recipients can only buy food by non-name brands (Value Time, Foodclub, etc). *This could also eliminate fraud for people who sell foodstamps for cash.
2. Cash assistance should be cut off completely but since that isn't going to happen, it needs to be monitored, and similiar to the proposed food stamp changes, recipients should only be able to spend money on things of need. If you need clothes you have Walmart, Target, Kmart, etc. Shoes? Payless. *This could encourage recipients to work for the clothes/shoes they want. Why should someone on welfare be able to afford clothes/shoes the working can't?

Do you think these would work?

Answer 1

I am so with you! Welfare should be a thing of the pass but if we have to have it I agree there should be a limit on what these "poor" people can buy and were they can shop (No name brand foods/snack, no name brand clothing) Nothing bothers me more then when I am at the grocery store and I have to purchase store brand items for my family because we are on a budget and the person in front of me is purchasing all the name brand items and paying with food stamps. I work hard for my money and so should they.

I also think that if a person is collecting aid from the government they should not be allowed to own a car, house, or any other item that requires them to have to make monthly payments. Anyone who is claiming to be poor better be poor.. no cable tv, no computers, no cell phones. NOTHING!!! If an individual needs help from the govenment then they better not have any of the luxury's a person not on welfare can't afford.

I also disagree with the fact that the government offers these people job training. Why pay for job training for people who don't want to work? Job training should be offered to people who are working and want to better themselves. Give the "poor" people the dead end jobs. (It doesn't take a rocket scientist to flip a burger or bus tables!)

Medical Assistance! Again, why is it that a "poor" person can get medical assistance and most of the working class people don't have it because it's to expensive. Give medical aid to those people who are working and let the "poor" do without!

Now that's Christmas you have all these charities who want to help the "poor". Let the "poor" help themselves. Let these people explain to their children on Christmas morning that the reason they don't have any gifts under the tree is because mommy and daddy are to lazy to find a job. If charities want to help someone help the people who do have job,

The welfare system of today needs to be done away with. The "poor" of today know how to work the system they are taking advantage of not only me but of you, your neighbor, your friends and family, and your children!

Answer 2

I appreciate that you want to reform the program, but the best solution is to get rid of it entirely. The government has no business at all in the charity business. It should be left to individuals, private organizations, and charities.

There are countless reasons why the private sector will do the job better, I'll try to hit some of the highlights:
1. Choice. The government is a monopoly, and everyone agrees that monopolies are a bad thing. If I disagree with something the government program does, what can I do about it? Nothing, they will still force me to give them money (taxes) and then go about wasting it as they see fit. In the private sector, I have thousands of charities to choose from. If I give my money to the Red Cross, and they screw it up, then I can choose to give it to someone else.

2. Efficiency. The government takes my money all the way to Washington D.C. Then they give part of it to themselves, part of it to the IRS to enforce that I give them money, part of it to a beaurocracy to run the progam, part of it to a beaurocracy to watch the first beaurocracy to make sure it isn't corrupt, part of it to the politicians re-election campaigns, etc. By the time they get around to giving it to the needy, it is only a tiny fraction of the amount they took from me. In the private sector, I can give my money directly to the needy, or to a local charity that has virtually no overhead costs (like a church). The private sector is infinitely more effecient.

There are many more good reasons to entirely end the federal welfare programs, but I'm out of time. I hope you have learned something and can recognize that ALL federal social programs are a bad idea.

Answer 3

Sparklyarse is a lady lol Regards to being more beneficial off on reward what a load of bollox! i have been on reward once for 3 months and It develop into the hardest time in my lifestyles No funds, no foodstuff, no electrical energy, no longer some thing! once you've a small kin, a million or 2 little ones then you actually are not in any respect more beneficial off on reward yet once you've a larger kin then convinced I imagine it does artwork of more beneficial claiming funds baby income, Tax credit plus JSA or income help, no longer a nasty thanks to stay I thoroughly agree that it truly is irresponsible yet theres no incentive for those human beings to get decrease back into artwork I actually have absolute no difficulty with households claiming income at the same time as they're experiencing actual worry mutually with the lose of a activity and so on i imagine there should be a time reduce on those lengthy time period scroungers Say a twelve months or 2? If someone develop into that determined for a activity they could discover one actual in that aspect

Answer 4

That's a good start. To add to it, I'd suggest that for those who've been on welfare a certain amount of time, say six months, and are unsuccessful in finding a job, will have a job found for them by the welfare agency. The agency will attempt to find a job in their field of expertise, but barring that, will locate any job that the individual can perform.

Answer 5

Its a good idea. In theory it could work but I don't think in reality it would. Too many lazy people in the world.

Answer 6

Be thankful that you are able to work and able to provide for yourself and your family. Yes, your plans for reform sound very reasonable.

Answer 7

amen my friend I believe the same thing, but no it will never hapen,