Should we start a WPA like program and force people on goverment assitance/welfare to work if they arent?

Question

the WPA was created during the great depression as a means of putting people back to work, doing things like building dams, roads, skilled work for the government, etc.

you always hear a lot of people on welfare staying on it because the kind of jobs they are qualified for pay less than what they would get for welfare, so why dont we just guarantee everyone a job and make people on government assitance do community improvement things like pick up trash, do various things for the government, etc. rather than just giving them a handout? And for the single moms that complain about not having anyone to watch their kids or daycare being too expensive, some of them can work as daycare providers.

yeah lol i heard some state actually experiemented doing something like this (think it was wisconsin) and their welfare rolls went down to like 1/4 of what they were because theyd rather starve or get money illegally or by other means than actually have a job

and like i saw somebody else post on this site once, they should get drug tested. since most jobs make you get drug tested so you can be able to pay for welfare, you should have to get tested to receive it.

Answer 1

I think that would be a really good idea (barring, of course, those people on welfare who physically cannot work).

Answer 2

WPA (Works Progress Administration) was created because of the GREAT DEPRESSION. Most of those jobs were probably not really needed, at least not right away, but it was the only form GOVERNMENT could get many of the millions of men without work to do something, make a bit of money, and probably avoid "internal conflicts" within the country!

Nowadays when things start to look just a bit similar to the 1930's DEPRESSION, well there are plenty of people out there which will tell you "a War is needed"! A war with another country, of course.

Now, what you say about people staying on welfare becaue they cannot find better paying jobs, I have no idea about the law in your state, but myself being from Florida which could somehow be considered a WELFARE state, the only people who get welfare (and only while proving to be working or efficiently looking for work) are single mothers. Men might get some foodstamps for the duration of their short unemployment, but absolutely no money.

Answer 3

The WPA did not "force" anyone to do anything.

Besides, the government just lost another billion dollars worth of stuff in Iraq (How do you lose tanks?).

Anecdotal problems with welfare do not prove anything; and no one is getting rich from their welfare payments.

The same cannot be said for the human, political, and financial Black Hole that Iraq has become.

=====

edit –

Unfortunately, Thompson’s changes did nothing to reduce the state’s illegitimate birth rate, which both the conservative Hoover Institute and Heritage Foundation note, “does much more harm to children's development than does welfare dependency” or reduce educational failure.

Are you more interested in helping people or in punishing them?

Do you have a clue how many Americans (and unless you have a six-figure bank account with no debt, yourself included) are only weeks or a few months away from possibly finding themselves in the same situation?

Answer 4

Forget that idea of mandating forced euthanasia. You forget you will someday reach that part of your life. The terminally ill that have machines helping them live at the expenses of the family or state should be allowed to pass, the only ones making money are the doctors and hospitals. The job market isn't being overtaken by people over 65, what you can see is the people over 65 years that because of the cost of living in the United States and supporting everyone coming into US looking for us to support them, have to go out and work again. The health care system isn't being strained by our older people, but by lazy no good non working young people, and also people that are coming into the United States with their health problems. You forget it was the old timers that were able to work and maintain what we have today. It becomes a problem when free loaders and people take advantage of a health system that they don't want to help maintain by working for benefits.

Answer 5

They could clean toilets in Government and state buildings maintenance clean trash along the streets,etc, Clock in to prove they have worked 40 hours a week and then they can get their welfare if it is above minimum wages. There is always some job they can do and it will save the Government money. Setting home in a third generation is just not acceptable.During the depression people worked for a very little wage or they starved. People had more pride back then and would do anything legal for money to support them and never expected money from the Government.

Answer 6

This has been suggested many times in the past, but the problem is that the people who are on welfare don't want to work! Therefore you would have to force them to do so. The result will be slip-shod work that is going to have to be done over!

I think that there should be laws in place that limit the time and amount that can be had from public assistance. Once that has been reached, you're done!

I'm 67 years old and I've never in my life been on welfare in any shape or form! I actually worked for a living. Is it too much to expect that everyone else do the same?

Answer 7

Welfare was reformed during the Clinton administration. Every able bodied person must now get a job or lose their benefits. Clinton also started the Americorps program, similar to what you are proposing. It is a domestic program where people can earn money for college and advancing themselves, while doing volunteer work in their communities. Americorps has been underfunded. Republicans call programs like Americorps Socialistic.

Answer 8

It is really a good idea. Like how they built Hoover Dam. Maybe they could help rebuild our infrastructure so we would not have to hire outsiders that want to charge us for roads and own our land.
But I would have a problem with them babysitting my children unless they were supervised.
You get a star!!!

Answer 9

Clinton did this back in the mid 90's with his Welfare Reform act.

Answer 10

Great idea! A job woould give them back their self esteem that is lacking. Let them earn a living. May give them incentive to get off the doles.

Answer 11

I don't see anything wrong with helping people to EARN what they get...it would build self esteem and perhaps lead to better jobs and education.