Children and babies only. We have to take care of our innocent. F the rest of the users.
The problem with stating that children shouldn't receive anything because they have parents is that if they are in that situation they obviously don't have good parents. We need to make sure that if their parents aren't taking care of them, somebody is. That requires money.
Edit: Here, Here on the post below me! I don't want to pay for their crack or their crackbabies.
2007-02-07 22:57:01
·
answer #1
·
answered by Nationalist 4
·
4⤊
5⤋
Ideally, our educational system wouldn't fail so many young people. Getting a diploma, supporting yourself, and using birth control and contraceptives would keep virtually everybody off of welfare. As for the under aged high school drop out with 2 kids, there's not a lot of opportunities for them until their kids start school. Most people find welfare checks offensive, but from a budget percentage it ranks much lower than Iraq war funds. I think we should take care of our own people first. If the welfare recipients were given job training courses and daycare services in addition to the checks they would more than repay that money when they entered the workforce and began paying taxes.
2007-02-07 23:26:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I believe that unless one is seriously disabled and totally unable to work, welfare is not an option. The welfare system was originally put in place to provide a temporary "helping hand" for a person or family who, through no fault of their own, came upon a rough spot financially.
I believe that welfare can still be that helping hand but should not last longer than six months. I think a once-a-month drug test should be mandatory, unannounced home visits should be held. They should go back to the old way of dispensing funds; paper vouchers, with a strict monetary value, for groceries - not allowed to buy anything but FOOD, rent checks sent directly to the landlord, paper vouchers for partial payment of utilities. If the recipient is a woman and she becomes pregnant while collecting, all benefits stop and her children (if any) put in foster care until she goes to work.
Welfare is NOT a life-style. I'm damned sick and tired of paying through my nose while perfectly able men and women sit on their duffs watching Bart Simpson on their new Wide-screen.
2007-02-08 07:43:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
This is a very big question. What I believe, every able bodied adult should have a job. This means if you are a single mom but you are well you get a job and support your children. I am more than willing to help you but if you are not working than I don't want you getting my tax dollars. If a person is totally unable to work than they need my help. I think they should be able to live a decent life ( not fancy and not one of poverty). People who are poor through their own actions ie: crack addicts, drug addicts, alcoholics should recieve no financial assistance unless they will enter rehab and stay until they have controll of their addiction. Then they may have assistance until they can find employment. No person should go hungry. To those that are physically handicapped I would say give them some good training that fits their abilities and help them find a job. To those with learning problems the same thing education, and then a job. All of this would put to work those that can and would mean the ones that cannot work would recieve greater assistance.
2007-02-07 23:19:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
I have recently done some study of some of the welfare and other entitlement programs offered is several states and I was greatly surprised to see how really low the poverty level $ amount is. I mean, around $13,000.00 is the federal poverty level. Please! That's a little over $1,000.00 per month for a family of three. The government should be ashamed. The level should be at least $20,000.00 if not $26,000.00. $26,000.00 would make it $500.00 per week before taxes, taking away the minimum 28% tax rate ($140.00) leaves $360.00 per week. Lets just say the rent is $500.00 and the power is $75.00 and the phone is $50.00 the weekly commute gas bill is $25.00 a small car payment of $300.00 insurance for the car $75.00 weekly expenses such as lunch money and lunch for the working employee/s $35.00 that leaves $305.00 a month (or $76.25 a week) for a family of three to eat on and do other stuff. Imagine if it were $13,000.00. Get real. No wonder the impoverished people in this country can't get a start.
2007-02-07 23:14:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by bamafannfl 3
·
5⤊
2⤋
A system with built in time limits which encourages people to return to the workforce as soon as possible. We are a rich country and we should be able to help those less fortunate in our society. For too long the welfare system has been viewed as an entitlement and this is a disservice to people in general. It is a disservice to taxpaying citizens because it forces a tax structure which rewards some for not taking responsibility for their own lives while punishing others who do. At the same time it is a disservice to the people receiving assistance because we promote the idea that they cannot help themselves and therefore require government intervention. People will rise to the level of expectation set in life and we should always set high standards for behavior and personal responsibility.
2007-02-07 23:03:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Bryan 7
·
6⤊
1⤋
2 year max and your off.
If on welfare ( for that 2 years) you have to be in job placement training or working FULL TIME. If not you get nothing.
If you cant support your kids Let someone that can raise them.
Must be a US citizen
No tax refund for child tax credit if your on welfare. That money needs to go to the government that is supporting you.
The children can eat at school for breakfast and lunch already , extend the school day 2 hours longerfor kids on welfare, make 1 hour a study and homework group and the 2nd hour providing dinner. The school systems make better use of the money then parents on welfare. They only charge less then 2.50 a meal for kids that pay but welfare kids would be free.
Make birth control manditory on welfare.
If you get child support , welfare needs to control that money for them because most dont use the money on the child.. They spend it on stuff for themselves, and if the dad is paying 400 a month the mom should have to show atleast 400 a month in income proving she is suppling !/2 the support also, not just support them from welfare.
If your on welfare and buy a new car............ You dont need assistance !!
If caught working and not turning it in, or getting money not turned in , or living with someone that is working and not reporting it......... Get a 10,000 fine, and blackballed from ever recieving assistance again.
If you CANT find job let the county give you jobs to do, such as trash clean up, shoveling driveways in the winter for the elderly ect. Dont just sit back and say POOR ME I NEED WELFARE.
If your ill the state needs to get you help, BUT ONLY IF MEDICALLY ILL Or a Senior....................
Seniors cant work and are old and ill , the government does very little if anything for them, but a woman that keeps having babies and lays on her butt and wont work, they give hundreds in food stamps , medical ect, and they make this a life choice not a short term fix.
To the man that said the government should be ashamed...... BULLSHIT........... The welfare people get free rent, free food, free medical, free childcare, free school meals, Most get help with gas and electric............ and just lay on their asses wont work and keep having children. Most fraud and claim to be seperated, or single and a man is still in the home and working and not turing it in................. They get 2000- 6000 in tax returns for child tax credit they didnt earn................. I know verizon phone company has a program that they install phones and charge under 30.00 a month for service for welfare people. So PLZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ They are on welfare cause they dont have to do anything. But a senior gets paid 240-600 a month on social security and welfare will only gove them 10.00 and 20% of medical coverage................. but a welfare woman they will give 400-800 in food stamps and 100% of medical.... and cash.......... and childcare ect ............ So do more research !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-02-07 23:59:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by tammer 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am leaning towards manditory sterilization for both fathers and mothers, after they have had two children on welfare. The rest of us must stop having children after two, and I see daily mothers and fathers with as many as 8 children born to various parents. In criminal court.
After that, I believe the entire system needs revamping. We encourage out of wedlock birth, and provide no safety net for the working poor. Why do we allow some mothers to work 2 jobs to support their own children, while giving them no help? Yet pay for others to stay home and make more babies? It makes no sense to me.
2007-02-08 00:19:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
guaranteed minimum standard of living with free job training.
No checks. Food, shelter, education, transportation . . .
No assessment of need. Available to Bill Gates as free as to someone who has lost there job and needs a career change, and someone going to collage or any other education/training or to folks who just want to be lazy and go nowhere
If you do the math, this is much cheaper than assessment of need. And will provide benefits to the economy. Those just looking for a free ride will be much cheaper than the huge bureaucracies who administer traditional welfare systems.
You have a person on one side of the desk making $30 to $60 k per year deciding if the person on the other side can have $10 k per year in benefits! Who's on welfare?
2007-02-07 23:42:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by DylisTN 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
No more free welfare checks! If you go on welfare you should be required to enter into a 40 hour/week educational or training program (with free childcare of course) for the entire time you are on welfare. This would get them into the habit of keeping a working schedule while at the same time teaching them skills to help them get good paying jobs. Absences and tardiness could be discouraged by docking their welfare checks and you could do the same for poor performance although allowances should be made for different ability levels. You could even provide nutritionally balanced meals so you wouldn't have to worry about hungry kids.
2007-02-07 23:07:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by Doug 3
·
3⤊
2⤋
first of all, bank transactions and spending should monitored closely for those who recieve benefits, to make sure unnecessary spending is kept to a minimum.
district accountants should be appointed for financial management and financial education for those who recieve benefits, to maximize their saving capacity.
naturally those who claim dependents should have first dibs on the allotted benefits; single moms, single dads, widowed moms, widower fathers, disabled parents, those with many children, families with incomes below the pverty line, etc, etc.
all people recieving benefits should be subject to no less four random drug tests per month, if they are found in violation of state and/or federal drug laws without prescriptions, their benefits should be cut off until they can successfully complete rehab.
anyone without a job, with the capability to physically and mentally perform the job, and recieving benefits, should be placed within a low level state job, such as waste management and basic roadwork, four days during the week and one day on the weekend, with at least one day a week to apply for at least one manditory job. also claim several days a month that those recieving benefits can elect to take off as 'workshop days' to visit workshops and job fairs that the state can provide transportation for if needed. the state should provide ample daycare for those who need it.
students should not be discriminated against to recieve benefits. school should be encouraged, and appropriations should be allotted to those who maximize their financial aid (which the state appointed district accountant can help with), but still need additional aid, and can keep at least a student job or part time job.
that would be my ideal system. its not taxably efficient, but its a start.
2007-02-07 23:25:53
·
answer #11
·
answered by alex l 5
·
0⤊
0⤋