If welfare was administered and used the way it was intended would we still have generational welfare families

Question

What do we need to do so that those who can't break cycle actually are helped to do so? Is creating more programs the answer or putting more money into the system?

JohnnyfromNC - I have seen the system work first hand. Not very often but I have seen it. That is why I understand the need to help those less fortunate. But my question is more how do we fix it so that the less fortunate get help and then learn to help themselves so they don't remain in the system. What needs to be done there. Are we not expecting people to better situations so it is a self fulfilling prophecy? I don't know.

Sorry JohnfromNC - I call my brother johnny - bad habit. I apologize for getting the name wrong.

Truthisback - First I don't consider myself a liberal in fact I consider myself a conservative. I know that the system is different than it was in the past. I have worked in the system that is why I still feel that things are administered poorly even with changes. I ask the question because I keep hearing how the goverment is not doing enough help the poor and those less fortunate. I have nothing against helping the poor and less fortunate and I believe that we should do this. I think I just get frustrated with those who seem to think that you shouldn't expect people to change - that you just need to continue helping some people. I think I am more wondering were the personal responsibility comes in.

Answer 1

Welfare is one of the social diseases destroying our country. If it has been done properly it would have encouraged people to support themselves.
Educating and training people to be self sufficient instead of building their dependence on the system.

Answer 2

There is less dependence on the federal government than there was when the Great Society programs were put in place, precisely because we've cut the tax burden, thereby producing an economy in which more of those people could move up - we addressed the problem of people falling through the cracks by filling in most of the cracks.

Because that was indirect and did not involve increasing direct handouts to individual people, the Left can't see it.

We now have 4.6% unemployment and 2.6% CPI - - - some people you can't help, won't be helped, you can lead a horse to water.....

Sorry but that's reality - most people who "can't break the cycle" there's more to the story, usually drugs, and that's just not my fault or responsibility - - kids and adults alike see and hear "say no to drugs" more often than they see and hear a gecko selling car insurance - if they're still bent on self-destruction, you just have to let them go.

If you Libs really believe in Darwin, apply him to all species including our own.

Seriously, "when everyone is paid a living wage" - - regardless of what they do for it? People don't pay for more than they get - consumers don't, thus producers can't. It's like saying "when everyone has bones that don't break, there will be less need for physical therapy."

There WAS a time, generations ago, when families helped each other - - because they kept even more of their money than they do now, thus they had the money to do that.

Answer 3

No, institutional welfare hasn't existed since the mid 1990s. And, the only subsistence checks that are on going are for those who are desperately in need; disabled, mentally unable to care for themselves, etc. Ongoing Welfare became a 1 or 2 year and you are out proposition in the 90s.

Sure some do take advantage; but as a society we are called upon to help those who deserve and desperately need our help. Government does not exist so that the individual can dictate the rules to the masses. Many people are not as fortunate as you and I, and not for reasons that they created. Compassion should have a place at the government table, and not just for the corporations and wealthy Americans.

Answer 4

I bet you can't point to a successful instance yet. Remember the fraud in the hurricane assistance? Both in Florida and the Gulf Coast states. You're dealing with human beings and many will take whatever they can get at the expense of others. There is no way around it. These programs can not be administered on the large scale that you are asking about. If they could, they would've been by now. There are already rules in place to prevent fraud and they are pretty much ignored. If you ignore the rules already in place then expect any new rule to be circumvented.

E: No offense. People used to refer to me by that name. I'm all for helping the needy. I believe that's us, you, me, all of us, need to do it. Solving the problem will require more than one fix. Changing attitudes, enabling people to work by making their skills more appealing to businesses, getting to the root cause of the problem. I also think that once a government position or agency is created to do something, those people have a vested interest in keeping their jobs viable. They also want to work. You can see where the cycle keeps going. People who work in this area want to keep working and the needy provide that viability. The loop keeps going. Justification for more funding is made. On and on it goes.

We all want to work and it's normal to want to do everything in your power to justify your contribution to the place where you work. The problem is when government does it. Government is tax funded and all fund increases come at the expense of all of us. At some point we can't afford reductions in our income via taxes.

Generational welfare exists because we enable it. Offer it and you can bet people will take it.

Answer 5

I think we would have far fewer. The main problem is that people who grow up poor and on welfare don't have a lot of guidance to get off of it. There have been successful programs that, instead of creating low-income housing projects, built middle-class condo's and had one out of every four be reserved for low-income families. That way, the kids grew up in a neighborhood where it was the norm for people to be taking care of their things, heading out for work, etc. That little bit of modeling made a huge difference. So do programs like Big Brothers/Big Sisters of America.

There have always been a minority of lower class people who never bothered to rise out of their situation. We as a society don't want those dying in the gutter. But for the majority who do only want assistance, a better focus on the consquences of HOW we provide it will definitely improve the situation.

Answer 6

The only system that works... is no system..

There was a time... when families & friends helped each other out in their times of need... Extended families living under one roof, working together to help one another...

People feel they are 'entitled' to welfare.. because of this and that... Why do people feel they are entitled to my hard earned money?

There are no solutions either.. No matter what you give, they will want more.

In my city, they can get section 8 housing, (which in some cases helps them buy a home & some have monthly housing payments of 100-300 month for a HOUSE... not an appartment.) They can get title 20 child care, and pay less than 100 a MONTH for full time care... add on top of that food stams, AFDC checks, utility programs etc, and their child support.. why would they want to work hard for a job?

It pays to be single with kids. Federal Income taxes, Earned Income Credits, etc, all benefit the single parent who makes 14,000 a year.

The people who are temporarly out of work getting things like unemployment during their hard times.. but the rest is for people who are and plan to remain at the poverty level. Because, well, its easier than working.

Many make money under the table, on the side, unreported.

Call it tough love, call it what you will... But scrap it all. Dont make me pay taxes so people can sit on their tail.

IMO, If the government is going to pay people, they should get work out of them. Have work centers (with free child care) and get the people to clean our streets, maintain our parks, do something that contributes to the city, in exchange for the money they are given. Toss in some on the job training there and kill two birds with one stone.

If people had to work for the government while they were collecting welfare, they might be more inclined to get a real job and get off welfare.

Answer 7

Put a lifetime limit on how long welfare can be collected. It should be viewed as a helping hand during difficulties, not a way of life. This will force the person to change their life in some manner, not sure if it will force more to crime or more to work.

Also, I think there should be some free training to teach *useful* skills to help the people change their lives.

Answer 8

The system is a piss poor one at best. They supposedly revamped the system a few years ago to educate them and get them out of the system. DOESN'T HAPPEN!!! My X got herself 2 degrees and rarely works. I still wonder why she needs 2. Obviously, the system should've 86ed her after 1. Some people abuse the system and should be penalized for it. Even a lot of the workers abuse the system by showing some how to get more, and making it harder for people who really need help. The system is unfixable!!!!!

Answer 9

NO we would not

There are A LOT of people making money off of welfare, and I am NOT talking about the recipients. how about taking a look at the people at the top who are making money? Why would they actually do their jobs and work to get people off of welfare? They like the status quo, and really don't want to change a thing.

Answer 10

Either shut down the system and send the money directly to the permanently poor, sort of like we do for social security...

or..

Make the time limits stick and hope that their will to survive is greater than their will to remain sedentary.