If we as citizens of the United States wanted to do away with Welfare what steps do we take?

Question

I totally believe we need to do away with or make some major changes in the welfare system!!! What steps do we need to take the get the ball rolling?

PS. What changes would you suggest?

Answer 1

send the people who get the welfare back to Africa

Answer 2

Like some said find those who believe what you believe and vote for them. When the republicans used to be more conservative back in the 90's they presured Clinton into signing wefare reform even though he had rejected it 3 times before. But to me it's all about haveing too big a government in the first place. Welfare and government sticking their nose into things like education have hurt not helped this country. If I had my druthers government would be restricted to having a strong military to protect us and passing laws that the people ask for not rich lobbists. And last but not least make it public knowledge on how they spend the tax money they recieve and be accountable for how they spend it. I think no matter who is president or in charge of congress now a days government is just to big. Let us keep even more of our hard earned money and let us handle things like education and welfare on a state level or on the private side. Workfare is a good idea but do it on a state leven not federal. The more hands the money passes through the less there is when it gets to where it was supposed to go in the first place. People in government should have to have a real job at least half the year to stay in touch with reality. and while they are SERVING in Washington do our bidding because they ran for an office that they think they can do a good job at because they have the interest of their country at heart not big government. If this government were put in charge of the Sahara desert it would probably run out of sand in 5 years lol

Answer 3

Doing away with welfare would not be productive for your country. There will always be a needy element in society: whether due to mental handicaps, physical handicaps, or uneducation. Should a single mom with little kids receive welfare, or should she get a job? This is disputed by many. The question is: which benefits your country more, her getting a job (at probably minimum wage) or her being there for her kids so they end up decent citizens? There are lots of statistics to show that the young children of single working moms (moms who are never there during their kids waking hours) end up feeling 'orphaned' and costing the state much more in the future.

There will always be some people who abuse the system, but the future pros outweigh the cons.

The measure of a county's humanity can be shown in how it looks after its unfortunate.

Answer 4

The last thing you should do is get rid of the Earned Income Tax Credit, the one program that rewards people WHO WORK and yet remain very poor.

The best way get rid of welfare is to get rid of the demand for it i.e. improve the economy at its base: manufacturing. Create jobs that folks on welfare can actually apply for and get, jobs that help them get out of the downward spiral of poverty.

If you don't happen to be in a financial position to create jobs with a snap of a finger, volunteer at a job bank or job training facility & help those who don't have jobs to get them. And when a big company cuts jobs here only to move them to a third-world country, let that company know that it has lost your business. Vote with your dollars.

As private citizens, that's some of the things you can do. There will always be some poor people who slip through the cracks of any economic system, and that's why we have safety nets like welfare. But if you really want to reduce welfare, reduce the demand for it.

Answer 5

First, we would realize that there is no justification for the federal government taking money from one individual and giving it to another, unless that recipient is an employee or retiree of the federal government. It is not one of the powers in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

Next, we need to realize that the first source of support for those in need should be their families. If there is no family, or the family is destitute, their church or some local charitable organization, like the Salvation Army. Finally, a town will make sure that nobody is allowed to starve or freeze to death.

The object is to keep it at the lowest level. The agency providing the assistance needs to know who they are providing the assistance to. When the assistance comes from the federal government, the recipient can collect under several names, children can be used by several "families" to augment their payment.

I think the food stamp program was intended to be fraud right from the start. Twenty percent of the food in this country is wasted. Bruised or over-ripe fruit and vegetables can be made available to people in need. Food left over from National Guard drills, school cafeterias and other institutions can be donated to soup kitchens, staffed by volunteers.

The bottom line is that we all, as individuals, have an oblilgation to help those in need. It is not the function of federal government.

Answer 6

You can't do away with welfare. There are people that legitimately need help at times. You'd be hard pressed to find a good American that wouldn't help someone who honestly needed help. However, something does need to be done for those that just park on welfare. One of my wife's cousins had a kid 3 years ago. She's on title 19, welfare, food stamps, and something else(I can't remember which program it was) She works full time with my wife, but purposely doesn't make much so that she keeps her welfare check. She knows the daddy of the kid (but he isn't much better) and has the resources to make it on her own (her mom lives 2 blocks away and watches the kid all the time). Is that fair? no. Is that healthy for her or America? No.

You get evaluated after 6 months. If you honestly need it, you get evaluated every month. If you can make it off welfare, get the hell off..

Answer 7

Im laughing at the liberals like Ri who is on welfare no doubt, and dave of the welfare people. This economy is fantastic. If u are healthy and wont work in this environment, you never will.

Start supporting conservative leaders who believe in personal responsibility. There will always be help for the infirmed or the disable, that is not the problem. But trying to use the government for free healthcare will be the next big one. If this is done it will double the entitlements that are paid out now.

Answer 8

for starters hire every person who wants to be hired full time FULL Time..pay them a LOT more than minimum wage..Even those who work part time should get insurance AFFORDABLE insurance.. Lower the cost of colleges and offer more financial for those who wish to go to college..those who get a degree get a job..get off welfare..do something about the cost of daycare. Even people who work full time can't pay daycare and are better off not working..Have a daycare that's open 24/7. Do you know how hard it is to find a job working 6:30 am-5 p.m M-F if you aren't lucky enough to be a teacher or something..It's impossible. STOP punishing those that do need welfare..for instance..I am on disability and yes..on welfare per say..Last year my social security check went up $12, my rent up $10, my food stamps went down 10..I lost $8.00..People can't get ahead that way..IT's that way when you work too..They punish you for working...How are people supposed to get ahead and get off the system if they won't let you make 50 cents without punishing you.

Answer 9

The system certainly needs to be revamped - just look at this "question" from a welfare queen: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiS68pP5rRovth4V7Ry4ZWDsy6IX?qid=20061212114317AAEzWBf&show=7#profile-info-c2398ce06777db8c0b61303be63071e3aa

What a disgrace.

Sadly, I don't see the ball rolling anytime soon. The Democrats have too much power, and they won't want to alienate such a large chunk of their voter base.

Answer 10

Let's just break a few laws to get it done. How about starting with mandatory sterilization of all the males who don't use condoms every time they have sex.

Then let's say that if a child is born out of wedlock, they are put up for adoption...no choices whatsoever for the mother.

Finally, let's take away everyone's rights to go to a hospital for an emergency, unless they can pay for it. Basically, this would kill off the entire poverty class in about 20 years.

And if you take any of this seriously, you're a moron.

Answer 11

One alternative short of just eliminating any public assistance is to provide limited public assistance tied to a specific event. For example, people directly affected to 9/11 for a period up to three years past the event. Or during a recession and up to two years past indicators suggesting an economic turnaround.

But this only speaks to the federal level (TANF); states would still be allowed to provide their own types of assistance.

I think federally we are moving down the road of having the leanest public assistance programs of most first world countries. TANF limited assistance to five years during one's lifetime and with reauthorization, the feds are further placing severe limitations on the program by scrutinizing states.