Welfare in part benefits the rich as well as the poor. It helps the poor
economically and it keeps the streets save and free of beggars and looters for
the rich to enjoy their saunters about town.
I worked for 30 years and paid over $70,000 to unemployment insurance. You know,
insurance in case you lose your job. When my industry suddenly stopped my
insurance benefit was $20,000 paid out over a year from a state that treated me
like I was on welfare. That is a bad insurance plan.People in this
state that think I chose to sit home and collect $1666 per month instead of
working are living in lala land.It takes hard work to change
industries. I now understand it is better for the highly educated to look for a
job full time or start a business so they can be tax payers again rather than
grab whatever job from someone else and neither party makes enough to pay
taxes.The best thing about being unemployed was learning what the
real world is like and what an awful opinionated jerk I used to be regarding
those that receive benefits.
Yeah I once saw this one person abuse the system and saw one news story about
someone abusing the system so naturally I now know that all people abuse the
system- once I questioned that but then listened to talk radio all day and found
out I was wrong- all poor people are where they deserve to be and if we would
just depend on peoples generosity to give to poor people we would not need a
welfare system- I generally find people who think private donations will solve
all poverty problems to be the most optimistic people in the world when it comes
to human nature- problem is those people also think most people are welfare
cheats and looking for a free handout and people are lazy by nature- so which is
it- are you so optimistic that all "wealthy" people will willingly give
as much as is needed or do you feel everyone is a cheat? Your response I am
both because we will design a system where people will work and not be able to
cheat- ahhh so you are overly optimistic- give generously without judgement and
I suspect you will be safest at judgement day
I find it curious how we first demonize those who are unemployed then demonize
the working poor and students. We don't want to subsidize family planning
programs, education or training programs either.Students are
required to work 20 hrs/wk before they are eligible for foodstamps.The culture in the U.S. is very individualistic--every man for
himself--compared to that of other countries where people view themselves
collectively as part of a larger society. An interesting article would be one
that provides details regarding the social safety net differences between
countries, such as work requirements etc. How does one tell looking
from the outside the difference, the difference between laziness and
hopelessness/depresion? What we don't see much of in the media
are life stories of individuals or families who struggle day-to-day.
@ VIDARMy understanding is that the money given to banks had to be paid
back with interest. So it wasn't welfare and it has all been paid back,
with interest. Thought you should know.
My biggest issue are the outliers and the exceptions on both sides. The rich who
take advantage of the system, and the poor that do the same. If we had more
honest, hard-working people, that weren't trying to scam the welfare system
or the bail out system, more of us in the middle would be happier.
To "george of the jungle" but the government welfare programs are not
compassionate. They are quite demeaning. They tell the recipiants that they
are not good enough to work, and that it is easier to go on welfare than to
actually work. The welfare system is also abused by people who intentionally
use it as a way of having the government subsidize their way through college.If the government wanted to be compassionate, they would give the
welfare recipiants a broom and a check. Give them some dignity as they receive
aid from the government.The government welfare system is out of
control. When a single mother has to earn over $60,000/yr before their
lifestyle is better than on welfare, that is a sign that politicians are being
far too generous with public money.
To act or to be acted upon that is the question.Reward or regret?Our
nation's poverty reate is 15% in 2012, which is the 6th year that it has
failed to imporve.Segments affected:Education - High School ONLY
educated.Race - Hispanics 37%; wites 30% and blacks 26%Income -
Single moms @ 41.5% or 41 millionMarriage- 8.7%Plus home ownership
declined for fifth straight year to only 63.9%Work is a principal with a
promise. If you will work you will make it.A democratic once coined the
term: Ask NOT what you country can do for you BUT ask what you can do for your
country! I would answer work work work and be grateful to be able to work 6 days
a week.I have never met a poor worker but alot of poor who do NOT work.
Its also important that people understand the labor market and that people
outnumber jobs available in every single sector of the economy. without that
knowledge, they assume people are just lazy. this would be good information
for a newspaper to share. "In her analysis, EPI economist Heidi Shierholz
notes that unemployed workers far outnumber job openings in every sector, which
demonstrates that the main problem in the labor market is a broad-based lack of
demand for workers—and not, as is often claimed, available workers lacking
the skills needed for the sectors with job openings." epi.org Knowing
this might not allow people to ease their conscience so completely by
stereotyping the recipients as either undesirable, minorities (Reagans welfare
queens), or otherwise inferior to their high and mighty selves.
Killpack:I agree with you, which is why I oppose tax money being
stolen from hard working Americans to line the pockets of defense contractors
for weapons systems we don't need.If we're so free, why
can't I elect to *not* pay my portion of our exorbitant defense spending,
and rely on my trusty 30.06 to repel some theoretical invader from another
country?If I build a compound and I'm self-reliant, why should
I be forced to pay property taxes to educate children who aren't my own?
Will I ever truly own my own property? If I don't pay their extortion to
pay to educate the children of young adults who selfishly bring children into
this world expecting others to pay for their education, they'll throw me
out of my house. Where's the freedom in that? In reality, we
live in a totalitarian dictatorship where freedom is a cruel illusion.
A few facts:USDA data show that 20% of SNAP participants have no
income, while the rest either earn wages or receive government assistance. Hoouseholds with children receive 71% of all SNAP benefits.Monthly income generally must be at or below 130% of the poverty line, or
$2,069 for a three-person family in fiscal year 2013. Households with an
elderly or disabled member need not meet this limit.Its monthly net
income, or income after deductions are applied for items such as high housing
costs and child care, must be less than or equal to the poverty line.Its
assets must fall below certain limits.Some categories of people are not
eligible for SNAP regardless of how small their income or assets may be, such as
strikers, most college students, and certain legal immigrants. Undocumented
immigrants also are ineligible for SNAP. Most unemployed childless adults are
limited to three months of benefits in many areas of the country, though this
limit may be waived in areas of high unemployment.The average SNAP
recipient received about $133.41 a month in 2012.
A few years ago we gave 1.5 trillion dollars in welfare to banks and Wall
Street, when they were down on their luck.We gave welfare to auto makers
when they needed it.We regularly give farm subsidies to millionaires. Why
do we subsidize oil companies? What about other crops like sugar, and corn?Why do we subsidize wool? This was necessary in the civil war; do we really
still need to do this?Is subsidy another name for welfare?Why do we
sell flood insurance to millionaires that build their homes on the seashore?Why is welfare to the rich a good thing, and welfare to the poor a bad
thing?No one ask me if it is ok to take my money and give it to a bunch of
millionaires and billionaires.
Killpack, what country do you live in? I'm very happy to live in America
where such things happen only in the rantings of hate radio broadcasters and the
people who believe their nonsense.Meanwhile, here in America, we
enjoy a standard of living that can only be dreamed of by citizens of other
nations. We enjoy freedoms that are the envy of others. We have a government
with protections that don't exist elsewhere. We still believe in helping
our neighbors when help is needed.I hope that some day you are able
to move to America -- the real America -- and begin to enjoy the kind of life we
actually have here.
There are thousands, if not tens of thousands, or die-hard conservatives who
preach self-reliance, work for what you get, etc. Then when times are tough
they rationalize it's OK to get in the unemployment line. Or with a
self-inflicted disbility brought on by obesity or some other avoidable health
issue, they rationalize it's OK to go on permanent disability.
Conservatives are are often guilty of hypocracy.It seems at the
core, we are all pretty much alike.This article clearly points to
our prejudices and narrow-minded judging of others. We cherry-pick scriptural
or other justifying sources.The facts are (1)our world is more
prosperous than ever before ,(2)we are more wealthy than our previous
generations, (3)we look down on and disdain the lower class.Someday
we will account for our attitudes toward the poor.
There are no new facts in this article, nor is there any conclusion. It's
merely restating a longstanding controversy in another way. The author should be
transfered to the weather department, where floating balloons has some utility.
Though the findings of this "study" seemed ridiculously obvious (people
were more in favor of welfare for those who seemed most likely to need/deserve
it) I think the fact that its conclusions, at least as reported in this story,
were so racially biased discredits its authors.
I don't mind giving my money to those in need. I do mind someone or the
government taking my money to hand it out.I don't mind if needy
people are on welfare. I even understand that some need welfare for their entire
lives. I am perfectly fine with that. What does bother me having neighbors that
pop children out from different baby dads and then tell me how much they're
getting for each child in welfare support, yet neglect to take care of those
kids that they casually have to get more money. I'm not stating that
everyone on welfare is like that. I'm stating that does happen and there is
nothing to decentivize these people from popping kids out for more welfare.I don't mind foodstamps. It does bother me working with people
that are on food stamps and hearing them complain about how much they get, when
they get a bigger budget than I get for my family. How am I suppose to feel that
is equitable?Iunderstand it's hard to get jobs. What bothers me
is having applicants coming in and not wanting to be hired,becausethey
It must be quite a study to pigeon hole respondents with "racial
resentment." I wonder how they pulled that one off. But the politicians will
eat it up.
Even though I would much rather see welfare left up to private charities than
have a forced (i.e. taxed) government program, I would be much more in favor of
the government programs if they tried harder to prevent waste, fraud, and
abuse.We have all seen the investigative news stories that show lazy
bums who won't lift a finger to work but expect you and I to buy their
twinkies, beer, and cigarettes. We could dismiss those anecdotal stories as
exceptions, but that kind of thing is becoming quite common as millions of new
people are added to the rolls of food stamps, welfare, and other programs each
year.We are sending the message loud and clear that you are a chump
if you work hard because too many are getting a free ride. Lend a helping hand
to those in need, but DEMAND that they meet you halfway unless they are truly
handicapped. But with so many healthy people qualifying for "disability
payments", be careful how you define that term as well.
Re:dragonswifeUnder the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, the following rules
apply:Most recipients are required to find jobs within two years of
first receiving welfare payments.Most recipients are allowed to receive
welfare payments for a total of no more than five years.The states are
allowed to establish "family caps" that prevent mothers of babies born
while the mother is already on welfare from receiving additional benefits.States Take Over Daily Welfare OperationsIt is now up to states
and counties to establish and administer welfare programs they believe will best
serve their poor, while operating within the broad federal guidelines. Funds for
welfare programs are now given to the states in the form of block grants, and
the states have much more latitude on deciding how the funds will be allocated
among their various welfare programs.
God provided for all, as He was the creator of all. He provided a plan that all
men would be cared for, however, He did not intend for man to be lazy and rely
on others. He instituted care for the poor, orphans, and widows, however He gave
us His wisdom in 2 Thessalonians 3:10: "2 Thessalonians 3:10 (ESV) 10 For
even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not
willing to work, let him not eat." Our welfare system is a farce. Rather
than helping those who really need the help, many of those DO NOT receive the
help that is needed. I have first hand experience in helping many inner-city
poor and homeless and find those who really were in need didn't or rarely
received the help but many who were well off took advantage of our help.
If people are required to actively look for employment while on welfare, fine.
But, to be on welfare longer than a year or two, while sitting at home with all
of the amenities like cable, and still drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes
does tend to anger people. You set priorities, and cut where you can and have
to. And welfare should not be a lifelong lifestyle. Nor perpetuated for
generations in the same family.
Teach your children when they are small.Teach them to be thankful, and how
to work hard, for all they have. Teach them compassion for the less
fortunate. Enough compassion to teach them how to fish, rather than to simply
hand them another fish each day. For those who simply cannot fish, teach them
generosity and charity, to give without being compelled by the government.We are now seeing a great deal of people who are the product of parents who
neglected to teach them how to work, AND how to give.
Compassion and gratitude makes the world go round, The heartless and ungrateful
I am wholeheartedly, 100% opposed to the 'legalized' taking of private
property, by force, from one citizen and giving it to another. It really has
nothing to do with the recipient and everything to do with my views on property
rights and individual freedom. Unless you infringe on the rights of others, you
shouldn't have to worry about mafia-style tough guys coming to your house
with badge and gun and taking your money by force so they can give it to some
special interest. What happened to this country, that once upon a time paid so
dearly for freedom? We don't believe in it anymore?
Teach your children when they are small.Teach them to be thankful for all
they have.Teach them to have compassion and understanding for those who
are different than they are. Let young ones grow up with opportunities where
they can learn to help those less fortunate than they are.We are now
seeing a great deal of people who are the product of parents who neglected to
have such conversations with their children.