Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Every time that welfare is discussed on this forum, it ends up in mud slinging, (from both sides), and no one ever has any actual answers. So, today, what I would like is for those on either side, Democrat or Republican, to give an honest, thoughtful answer to what, exactly, should be done to combat the welfare problem in this country, and further, explain, in detail how and why it would work. Don't just say, "raise the minimum wage" or "get rid of the fraud", "get a job", "get an education", because that doesn't explain, in detail, why and how that would work. (People do try to get jobs, people can't always afford the education, or, being non PC here, not everyone can get those degrees in engineering, or science, or become doctors, etc...let's face reality here.)
Which gives figures that illustrate that living on welfare is actually a more luxurious lifestyle for many than what type of lifestyle a person with only a HS education, or some college, would receive by working full time.
Further, to put some of the typical arguments to rest:
Quote:
There is little doubt that one of the most important long-term steps toward avoiding or getting out of poverty is taking a job.
Quote:
Only 2.6 percent of full-time workers are poor, as defined by the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) standard, compared with 23.9 percent of adults who do not work. Even part-time work makes a significant difference; only 15 percent of part-time workers are poor... And while many anti-poverty activists decry low-wage jobs, a minimum-wage job can be a springboard out of poverty...
Contrary to stereotypes, there is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy or do not wish to work. Indeed, surveys of welfare recipients consistently show their desire for a job. At the same time, however, the evidence suggests that many are reluctant to accept available employment opportunities.
Quote:
There are currently 126 separate federal anti-poverty programs, defined as either means-tested assistance or programs that are explicitly identified as intended to fight poverty.
Quote:
...welfare actually pays better in eight states, and nearly as well in numerous other states. Indeed, in 11 states, welfare pays more than the average pre-tax first-year wage for a teacher. In 39 states it pays more than the starting wage for a secretary. And, in the three most generous states, a person on
welfare can take home more money than an entry-level computer programmer.
Quote:
Less than 42 percent of welfare recipients are engaged in some form of work activity (though some of those recipients are engaged in more than one such activity). As Figure 3 shows, job training, continuing education, and even job search all meet the law’s requirement for “work".
Quote:
Not every welfare recipient fits the profile used in this study, and many who do fit it do not receive every benefit listed. Many welfare recipients, even those receiving the highest level of benefits, are doing everything they can to find employment and leave the welfare system.
Still, it is undeniable that for many recipients—especially long-term dependents—welfare pays more than the type of entry-level job that a typical welfare recipient can expect to find. As long as this is true, many
recipients are likely to choose welfare over work. This was true when Cato conducted its 1995 study, and it remains substantially true today. This is unfortunate for taxpayers who must foot the bill for such programs, but even more so for the recipients themselves. By making a rational short-term choice, recipients who forgo work for welfare may trap themselves and their families in long-term dependence.
That should squash many of the arguments seen on this forum, every. single. time. there is a debate about welfare reform.
Finally, while fraud abusers may be the minimum as compared to those who use their welfare as it was intended to be used, we cannot deny that those who abuse DO cost us a LOT of money every single year.
I would like for those, on either side, to discuss, rationally, after examining the pdf, using facts and figures, not by using emotions, not by blaming this side or that side, not by turning this in to a debate about who uses more welfare than others, (because it really doesn't fricken matter), to state:
1) What is YOUR solution, in detail.
2) Explain how and why YOUR solution will work.
Can we all agree that we have a problem in this country when it comes to welfare, the poor, poverty, etc? Regardless of what you think of it, can we at least agree on that much? It needs to be fixed.
Welfare recipients, like in the state of Maine, should work for their benefits - at least 20 hours a week.
It should also not be indefinite assistance. It should be limited to a lifetime benefit of X amount or X # of months. Some people literally are on it their entire lives.
ETA: also want to add that obvious exclusions would be disability - those who truly cannot work.
Welfare recipients, like in the state of Maine, should work for their benefits - at least 20 hours a week.
It should also not be indefinite assistance. It should be limited to a lifetime benefit of X amount or X # of months. Some people literally are on it their entire lives.
ETA: also want to add that obvious exclusions would be disability - those who truly cannot work.
How long do they have to look for a job? If they have only a high school education, and having lived in Maine I know very well that there's not a lot of full time jobs there, and even part time it can be difficult to get 20 hours a week...what do we do with those people?
How long do they have to look for a job? If they have only a high school education, and having lived in Maine I know very well that there's not a lot of full time jobs there, and even part time it can be difficult to get 20 hours a week...what do we do with those people?
As far as I know, job finding assistance is provided in most states. I know it's not easy to find jobs in ME, that state aside, jobs can be had if you're willing to work hard.
Can we all agree that we have a problem in this country when it comes to welfare, the poor, poverty, etc? Regardless of what you think of it, can we at least agree on that much? It needs to be fixed.
I'll say it: What's wrong w/ welfare that it needs to be fixed? We have no problem locking up millions of people @ $60k/yr per person, yet someone wants to live on $15k b/c they're lazy and we can't stand it.
The only solution that fixes a flaw in the system is phasing out benefits based on your income. Making someone choose between benefits or a low-wage job isn't a choice. Poor people are as rational as anyone, so they're going to serve their best interest. If you make it so that having a job reduces their benefits, instead of eliminates it, you'll encourage more people that can and are willing to work, to find a legit job.
The illegal manage to find jobs, housing and get food AND be able to send money back home every week.
And all this without the help of welfare programs.
The illegal manage to find jobs, housing and get food AND be able to send money back home every week.
And all this without the help of welfare programs.
Good point.
Like I said before, anyone who really want to can find a job. It may not be ideal, but there are jobs to be had out there. Nothing has to be forever. Welfare is not a "livable wage" anyway, not for most people. How can anyone be satisfied with such low standards for their families, LONG TERM?
I'd like to point out that every candidate on either side is wanting to cut SS benefits.
SS is something that was TAKEN from my weekly earnings without my consent and that money was not "taxes" that the government should have the right to decide how to spend it. Yet they are wanting to cut that.
Whereas, welfare is money that was ALSO TAKEN from my check in the form of taxes, and given to other people, many of whom have NEVER worked a day in their life. The government wants to keep increasing the list of recipients.
As far as I know, job finding assistance is provided in most states. I know it's not easy to find jobs in ME, that state aside, jobs can be had if you're willing to work hard.
Government job finding assistance is really designed for employers, not job seekers. The benefit job seekers receive is really just a collateral benefit which follows from the benefit received by an employer.
During a previous unemployment spell, I frequented a state job-finding office.
Job seekers could browse many job listings and select up to five, which they would then present to the desk person. When an employee became available, the job seeker would present the listings and the employee's job was to screen the job seeker so that referrals were made ONLY those jobs for which the job seeker was deemed qualified.
Since I believe I have skills beyond my actual job experience (my education and job experience are mismatched), I am inclined to apply for jobs for which a person taking a five-second scan of my resume considers me unqualified.
So I would bring five job listings to the table and be lucky to get referrals to only two employers.
American's on welfare is a tricky subject since there has always been a war waged on the poor. I would love to learn more about this "welfare fraud" since it is extremely difficult to not only receive but to deceive. From my experience, majority of welfare recipients are single woman with kids. Which makes sense since to receive welfare, you must have a child and technically not have two parents. Historical racism, segregation and lack of education & employment has led Americans to be dependent on welfare. One sociological theory floating around is that Capitalism needs an impoverished class in order for the upper class to succeed. I view it in much simpler terms, not enough jobs & jobs with good pay.
If you ask welfare recipients, they would love to go off of welfare if they could. Nobody wants to be confined to poor housing, fixed income and having the title of a welfare queen. There are some factors to consider. Some welfare recipients are scared to hold a job, because what if they get fired or laid off? What will they do next? The security of receiving a check in the mail is much more comforting than working a job. What if their job is minimum wage or slightly above? Why would any human being work full time and then come home to the same environment if they could just be on welfare? If they get fired from their job, not only they have no money but they are homeless. Welfare is security for those who cannot hold or maintain a job.
Once there are more jobs in the economy and living expenses decrease, then welfare will not be as needed much.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
