What is the reason for Social programs and welfare?

Question

I'll give you a hint, it has nothing to do with helping the poor.

Its the theory that if you give them a little they won't take alot.

It a way to bring about a stable society for the middle class and wealthy. If a poor person can't buy food what do you think they are going to do? Sit there and starve or STEAL IT?

Ask yourself again, who does welfare protect? The poor(who have nothing to lose) or the rich(who have everything to lose)?

MOTHER, obviously grammar is not your strong suite.

Answer 1

i personally belive no person should not be able to find a way to feed and sheltr them seleves in a correct socitey.

I aslo think if a socitey cannot find a way amoungst the billions out there to feed a person and shelter them, then by all means they have a right to survive and should do what ever is nessacary to do, and I mean whatever.

If socities feel no moral obligation twards thier people, thier people have no moral obligation to that socitey, it's a two way street.

Answer 2

Well, in a humane and civilized society, Social programs are put in place to give a helping hand to those citizens who might occasionally hit a bump in the road financially. It is better to try to help than sit and watch people and familys fall into starvation, homelessness, disease, etc.

The problem has been that too many people consider these Social programs and welfare to be a way of life. They somehow think the world owes them a living and they are too lazy to work. That is sort of where we are today. Welfare reform during the Clinton administration helped and the "welfare to work" program has been successful in a minority of cases. But, again, those who prefer to have the taxpayer support them have found loopholes - and there hasn't been enough oversite. Too many people just don't care.

Personally, I think welfare should be limited to 6 months and the funds should be given out in the form of vouchers only. Vouchers for rent, utilities, grocieries and the necessities. I believe that if a woman becomes pregnant or begins living with someone, the benefits should cease immediately. There would be no food stamps.

I believe that, if there are children in the family, they be required to attend school. If they are old enough to hold down a job, they should work.

Unless someone is seriously handicapped or mentally unable, they should work. There are plenty of jobs out there. True, not all of them are the most desireable and many are "minimum wage" but it is an income and gets them off the dole.

Meanwhile, I am not against giving a helping hand for someone who really needs it - keeping in mind the 6 month limit.

Answer 3

Well I guess we should do away with all social programs then, right? If have a free cheese give away ,is the only reason people are poor,, well then lets keep the cheese. screw them ... More cheese you. You are so smart why don't we have more people like you running our country? That's right we do they are super left libs. Sorry we have had enough crazy to last a while with this new congress throwing out the baby with the bathwater crap.

Answer 4

They were created to those during the Great Depression and weren't supposed to remain in place when it was over. Roosevelt also minted more money, which was VERY risky and with WWII, the economy stabilized.

Meh, I thought you said social security.

Answer 5

To give corporations tax incentives to move overseas. You did also mean Corporate Welfare didn't you?