Or, is it truly an entitlement? If they are able bodied and claim they cannot find a job do you feel that requiring them to do things such as pick up litter, maintain grounds of public buildings, etc. is unfair?
2007-11-27 06:56:02 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
YEAH! And when will you be running for President.....You have MY vote! That is a wonderful idea.
2007-11-27 07:00:01 · answer #1 · answered by amanda r 3 · 8⤊ 4⤋
Do you already know the quantity of homeless that could create? i've got not got the info yet i could say drug purchasers are truly intense (no pun) in numbers recieving welfare. truly burns me as much as. I make 6 figures from working complicated my entire existence too. no person could get a penny of my sweat, until eventually I supply it. entire bunch of lazy welfare deadbeats lived up the line from me as a new child. seems they continually had the cool toys, then motorcyles, autos, and so on. meanwhile my previous guy worked as a reformatory shield at evening and a florist in the process the day. mom worked a tabacco farm and raised 3 young ones. On Christmas morning, if i did not awaken with a ***** I had not something to play with. I hate freeloaders. possibly rather of drugtests they could be made to paintings for the money. Like cleansing up the roads/parks for the adult adult males. women individuals could paintings on the hospitols or soup kitchens.
2016-10-02 04:48:08 · answer #2 · answered by demosthenis 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that would be a great idea. Either that or they go to college and get an associates degree that gives them some kind of skill (plumbing, automotive, eletricity, etc etc) that is funded by welfare and have a certain time period to do so. I've been advocating this for a very long time. I think it would be really beneficial for our society and for the person receiving welfare. Since women with children are the group that are mostly the recipients of welfare, they could also be paid for child care in their presumably low income community. That way they are also helping out those who go work for someone else and who can't afford child care. Of course, they would need some education ( which could be as simple as having on the job training from a professional child care worker) for this but at least it would really serving the community as well. With this, there would be no time limit because they could be in service and not just receiving welfare. But they could still be paid by the government.
2007-11-27 07:01:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
Quoting Elana: "The NeoCon idea that all of welfare is tied up with people who actually want to be on welfare is laughable. Yes, there is abuse of the system and yes as tax payers we pay for that abuse. That doesn't mean that everybody abuses it."
This makes more sense than anything else that I've read so far. So why did you clowns give thumbs down? Don't like common sense? TOO BAD!
2007-11-27 15:22:50 · answer #4 · answered by SINDY 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Didn't Clinton put them to work? I for one am all for it. I am a liberal but there is nothing wrong with putting the able body people to work. I think it will even promote self respect.
2007-11-27 07:20:54 · answer #5 · answered by RELAX 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Not unfair at all - but don't y'think a chance at job training suited for the real world would be a heck of a lot better an investment?
2007-11-27 07:03:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
Depends on what your definition of "working for the government" is.
2007-11-27 09:48:04 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It really depends on WHY they are on welfare.
If you've got 28 children and a full time job, you simply cannot work another. And of course there are all kinds of people who end up on welfare or on the streets because they have some disability that the government may or may not recognize.
The NeoCon idea that all of welfare is tied up with people who actually want to be on welfare is laughable. Yes, there is abuse of the system and yes as tax payers we pay for that abuse.
That doesn't mean that everybody abuses it.
Personally, I think the most effective thing we could do to reduce the cost of welfare programs is to figure out how to enforce them better.
2007-11-27 07:01:56 · answer #8 · answered by Elana 7 · 3⤊ 7⤋
That used to be the case with prisoners. work on road crews, grow your own food several other tasks. Then the Gov was petitioned that jobs were being taken from needy Americans.
2007-11-27 07:03:19 · answer #9 · answered by Steam 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I think it's a great idea. My mom is on social security for many many medical reasons, and she does something on the computer for a government agency. She isnt paid or recognized for it, but it makes her feel better about getting government assistance.
2007-11-27 06:59:26 · answer #10 · answered by Snowboard Zombie 2 · 7⤊ 2⤋
Nothing, sounds good to me.
I remember algore tried something akin to this with a Welfare to Work Program.
2007-11-27 07:03:13 · answer #11 · answered by Think 1st 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋