You have reinvented the wheel. Most if not all states have a "Looking for work incentive" In order to qualify for Aid. It is a lot like getting your un-employment check, you must show proof of looking for work or no Check.They also have the option to go to school to get their G.E.D.'s and then some extra training. There are C.N.A.'S.........Auto mechanics, big rig truck driving training, Office procedures. To name a few. These people are down on their luck. Lets not kick them while they are down. It is not as easy to live off of the Government as you may think! They live way, way below the poverty level.
I used to work as a counselor for women who were victims of domestic violence and many were reentering the work force. I was one myself at one time. Living on Public Aid was awful! There was never enough money never enough good food. I went back to school and I received my Associates Degree in counseling so that I could help other women get back on their feet. Please do not Judge these people unless you have been in their shoes! I have been there and I thank God that there were programs to help.I had many insults from people who had no idea what they were talking about, and my kids were beaten up by kids who's parents had more. If it were not for my faith in God I don't know how I would've made it! Please believe me it was not an easy life!
2007-06-25 15:07:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by Pamela V 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Dear heart, in all of the states of the USA, the young and fit would not themselves be eligible for 'welfare.' Assistance, in the main, is for women with children living below the poverty line. There are Social Security benefits for the elderly and the disabled, but neither SS nor SSI should be considered 'welfare,' inasmuch as most recipients in these federal programs paid into SS during the years they were able to work. Belief that fit and young and able persons are on the dole is no more than a wacko right-wing Republican ploy to cease all...all...assistance to poor mothers, the elderly, and, yes, even the disabled. It isn't the piddling amounts of money that a frightened mother receives that should be your concern, but corporate welfare, the millions and even billions that the Bushies have given to major corporations in one way or another.
2007-06-24 00:26:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Generally speaking, I do think it would be a good idea to limit how much help people can get from welfare, and in many cases limit how long they can get it. However...
There are many other reasons why people might need help from society (social programs) such as welfare, however, besides being in school or being elderly. And I wouldn't say that being in school is a reason to need welfare assistance.
There are those who are mentally or physically handicapped, including the severly handicapped, who may need welfare assistance their entire lives. Let's not forget them.
There are many conservatives (not all) who would like to see social services eliminated altogether. Money should go to the wealthy instead, so they can buy products, build factories, and create jobs. Then there would be no need for welfare programs. But we cannot help those who truly need help by taking it away from them and instead giving it to the wealthy in the form of tax breaks.
Jesus said, "The poor you will always have with you." Tax breaks for the wealthy will not change that.
2007-06-23 23:53:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by Don P 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Do you know how it is to live off of welfare? My Mother had to do it for a little while until we could get back on our feet. Even going and asking was the hardest thing Mom said she ever had to do! Don't worry we didn't take to much of the tax payers money, then Mom was back to work as a C.N.A. I have an office job. I am only a receptionist the pay isn't all that great but it is a whole lot more than we had to live off of while we were on welfare!
2007-06-26 07:49:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by sheila g 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Bible says if you dont work, you dont eat. BUt, there are disabled ppl and the elderly that can no longer work, and the government should be here to help them, and will have money to do so if ran properly. But, if someone wont work, abslutley not, and it shouldt be an ongoing thing, year after year, after year. There should be a period of time for training, and helping the person to get educated enough for a job, and to help them, and then thats it. If they wont get a job and keep money, welfare money needs to stop. But, to those that seriously cannot work, it should be given as long as they need it. But, welfare money given to those lazy and not wanting to work, will rob us of the ability tohelp those that genuinley need it> Only the system lets them get by with this. Lets all keep this fresh in our minds and keep reminding the government agencies it has to run things properly or we all will lose.
2007-06-25 15:38:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by full gospel shirley 6
·
0⤊
1⤋