What you think of welfare program depends on how you view those receiving it

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    Dec. 14, 2013 9:22 a.m.

    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.

  • Canyontreker TAYLORSVILLE, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 5:26 p.m.

    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.

  • XelaDave Salem, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 2:48 p.m.

    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

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Dec. 12, 2013 2:09 p.m.

    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.

  • Chieftess Ivins, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 1:55 p.m.

    @ VIDAR
    My 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.

  • sky2k1 Provo, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 1:08 p.m.

    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.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 11:28 a.m.

    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.

  • Gregorio Norco, CA
    Dec. 12, 2013 11:08 a.m.

    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 million
    Marriage- 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.

  • elisabeth American Fork, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 10:48 a.m.

    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.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 10:33 a.m.


    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.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Dec. 12, 2013 10:31 a.m.

    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.

  • VIDAR Murray, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 10:23 a.m.

    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.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 9:53 a.m.

    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.

  • Conservative Cedar City, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    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.

  • KanataHal Ottawa, 00
    Dec. 12, 2013 9:32 a.m.

    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.

  • samhill Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 9:10 a.m.

    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.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 8:53 a.m.

    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 makemoreonwelfare.Yesthatdoeshappen.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 8:52 a.m.

    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.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 8:36 a.m.

    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.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Dec. 12, 2013 7:32 a.m.


    Under 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 Operations
    It 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.

  • Noah So Ogden, Ut
    Dec. 12, 2013 6:55 a.m.

    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. Interesting!

  • dragonswife Tremtpm, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 6:45 a.m.

    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.

  • md Cache, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 6:39 a.m.

    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.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 5:48 a.m.

    Compassion and gratitude makes the world go round, The heartless and ungrateful stops it.

  • killpack Sandy, UT
    Dec. 12, 2013 12:46 a.m.

    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?

  • ThornBirds St.George, Utah
    Dec. 11, 2013 9:24 p.m.

    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.