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

2007-05-07 13:01:09 · 20 answers · asked by Ben 2 in Politics & Government Civic Participation

Why should those who work hard help pay for those that may belazy or want to live off others? I am not to say that there are plenty of people on it for legitament reasons and actually need help.

Also, should there be better control and "checking out recepients" to see if they truely need it and check-ups for those currently on welfare?

2007-05-07 13:42:24 · update #1

20 answers

all depends the situation.
if you are truly worthy of it - lay off/loss of job, single parent, not any luck finding a job. doctor verified medical issues - i support it.

someone who doesn't work, won't work, and not looking for work - go get a job!!!! i don't want to be supporting anyone that has a willing and able body, but just too lazy to get off their butts and so they can be supported by my hard working body.

while i am living check to check, and working 2 jobs to support my family, there are plenty of lazies out there manipulating the system so they can live for free.

the welfare admin need to open their eyes and see what its doing to the working class...if they fall on hard times, most of the time they don't get the help they need. because the funds aren't there.

its a good slap in the face.

2007-05-07 13:14:47 · answer #1 · answered by karianna 2 · 0 0

What Welfare? Pres. Clinton ended the Welfare Program. Those who are receiving some pitifully small form of relief today surely aren't harming the economy in any way and have to prove that they desperately need help.

Unlike the Corporate Giants and Billionaires in this Country that the GOP has given all of the wage earners tax dollars to; and ran up at Trillion Dollar deficity and 5 trillion dollar debt doing it.

You have your priorities really mixed up.

Unless you live in France. Then, excuse me.

2007-05-07 13:06:56 · answer #2 · answered by Jean B 3 · 0 0

It's good.
In Europe, where social democracy is much more common, there are fewer poor people as a percentage of the population, than the third world, which has no social welfare component.
Also, we all pay our taxes when working, so it's a bit like we pay our own benefits. European countries also have a higher minimum wage than the U.S. or third world countries, averaging $10.50 per hour. Germany's minimum wage is over $11.00, Luxembourg's is $17.00 per hour! This high minimum wage destroys the DEMAND for welfare, which keeps tax rates lower, and more people are paying taxes since the minimum wage so so high. I believe a high minimum wage fixes just about all social welfare problems, and high tax rate problems. Make capitalism work, damn it!

2007-05-07 13:15:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

People always assume that just because you work it automatically means you work hard. Who hasn't worked with some lazy bum who makes everyone else do half his work.

And to make it worse he probably gets paid the same. Sometimes he may even be a good butt kisser and get more raises than someone who actually works hard.

Do you think that athletes deserve the millions of dollars that they get for playing games while some hard working person gets peanuts.

Do you think that politicians deserve to get their large pensions even though they do a crappy job.

How about golden parachutes for a crappy or corrupt CEO while hard working people have their pensions stolen.

Do you think that Simple Simon Cowell deserves to be paid millions of dollars for sitting on his butt insulting people.

Life is full of injustice and having to try and survive on the pathetic kindness of human beings is one of them.

Remember all the people during the dirty thirties who wanted to work but couldn't because society couldn't provide them with jobs and they were treated like garbage.

In the eighties when the recession hit, if it wasn't for EI and Welfare it would have been similar conditions as the thirties.

All I can say is I hope I never have to depend on human kindness and generosity because it is seriously lacking.

2007-05-07 19:26:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I shouldn't even answer this question, I work with and see all kind of people of different or gins/race/age/disabilities, and in my person opinion, they have made it so hard for people who truly need it, the reason i say this is because:

So many people have truly ruined for others by abusing the system, there are people who cant get health care, who truly need it because of no insurance, no disabilities benefits because people have destroyed it.

I think Clinton had the right idea when he came up with the welfare reform, for those who was capable of working.

but for the people who truly need it who cant get it, it is truly ashame, I work in health care emergency medicine, and when you see the truly disabled, or elderly who are not getting proper medications, and etc. they gone to far with the strict guide lines.

If I have to pay out for someone in need then I will, if it means helping another, and besides that when it come to retirement I know to check out some good retirement investments, because they messing up that as well for all of us who now pay for it, because it wont be there when we retire, this one because of Bush...

Sorry but just my opinion on how it seems they mess with elderly, disabled or single parents.

2007-05-07 16:27:15 · answer #5 · answered by Chrissy 2 · 0 0

at the starting up Girly lady... the most folk on welfare are children, after children white women make up 38% of welfare situations, then it is going to African- human beings at 37%. you'll locate this training on the yank Psycological affiliation below women's application workplace. so a ideas as you buddy is going... merely because she's black would not propose she is ideal. Why does one of those tremendous form of folk get dissatisfied because of Affirmative action... it places all minorities.. no longer merely black. Why are not human beings mad at Asians, Hispanics, etc. variety is a good project. it really is what make it look racist once you in hassle-free words purpose black human beings. transferring on, i don't believe of that welfare is a foul project in any respect. I also do not imagine it hurst the commercial gadget particularly compared to the spending for ineffective and drawn out wars, etc. Welfare has been in this united states because the finished melancholy. It became made to be a short-term project that ought to eventually develop to the point that it would not be mandatory. in spite of the indisputable fact that, the different occurred. It grew and more effective regulations were further to that and it more effective. i think that there are those who choose short-term help. i do not believe making use of welfare as a mind-set to help. it really is why I do precisely like the hot coverage of TANF it really is short-term training for Needy households. It helps human beings to recieve help and places emphasis on getting back into the interest field. There are some subject matters round TANF, yet somewhat retooling ought to remedy this situation.

2016-11-26 01:44:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Welfare has been cut drastically to poor people. Women with children were the biggest recipients. Now women are having abortions to avoid welfare penalties. The public funds were transferred to corporate welfare a long time ago -- years.

Happy?

2007-05-07 16:35:53 · answer #7 · answered by ToYou,Too! 5 · 0 0

I say put a cap of 3 months on welfare. Anyone truly looking for work can find a job in 3 months if they are really trying. There could be 1 3 month extenstion and thats it.

2007-05-07 13:49:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I'd like to know how giving people welfare and disability checks each month is 'destroying the economy'.

Out-of-control government spending, government deficits, and a negative savings rate is what's hurting--not helping--our nation's economy.

2007-05-07 13:06:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Giving a hand-out might alleviate a problem in the short term, but does nothing but create dependency in the long term.

Giving a hand-up however takes care of the problem long term.

There are two philosophies on distributing the wealth:

Take from those who "have" and give to those who "have not".
-or-
Let those who "have" continue to invest their wealth in businesses and industry, which create more jobs and create opportunity for those who "have not" to "have"

Welfare begets more of those who depend on welfare

Wealth begets more of those who become wealthy.

If everyone tries to do better for themselves...they can not help but bring others up along with them.

2007-05-07 13:16:59 · answer #10 · answered by gcbtrading 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers