Do you think that Gingrich and Clinton should have abolished welfare entirely? (unemployment, minimum wage)

[redguitar77111]

There was talk about this during the Clinton-Gingrich era, but Clinton insisted that some parts of welfare continue. Do you wish that Clinton abolished welfare alltogether?

[JAMS14]

No.

[Hesychios]

Stupid idea, of course not!

[T-310]

Originally Posted by redguitar77111

There was talk about this during the Clinton-Gingrich era, but Clinton insisted that some parts of welfare continue. Do you wish that Clinton abolished welfare alltogether?

Yes. Hunger is a great motivator to work.

[Roboteer]

No. They should have devolved it to the states.

There's a reason why the Constitution forbids the Fed govt to hand taxpayer money to people who did nothing to earn it (one of the most violated parts of the Constitution).

[Cape Cod Todd]

There are some people that genuinely need welfare but there are many that abuse the system.

I would like to see the abuse stopped but in my state measures to stem the waste is usually blocked by the liberals. There was a call to put a photo of the card holder onto the EBT cards to prevent them being sold to another person but that idea was shot down citing that the EBT holder is already embarrassed enough. What?



Welfare used to be a program to help people through a rough time in their lives but now too many use it from the cradle to the grave, from the womb to the tomb.



Welfare abuse needs to be stopped but we need a welfare system.

[BobNJ1960]

It should have been eliminated, with a 24 month period first utilizing workfare.

Or , make it like unemployment insurance, 6 months max after (in welfare's case) every 10.400 hours of work with taxes fully paid. 10,400 = 5 fulltime employment years.

12 month maximum spent on welfare by any individual, over a lifetime.

[desertdetroiter]

No, and Gingrich was just talking outta his ass as usual. He wouldn’t have abolished welfare if the abolition was handed to him on a silver platter. No Southern Republican would. It would end their political career. Too much of their constituency needs it.

[Chance and Change]

What kind of crazy question is that!!! Questions like this Exemplify, why Republican mentality is simply an evil atrocity in America...

For the information of the unknowing, it was called the"Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act"

Clinton promoted a Welfare to Work, in which he aided companies to support hiring of disadvantaged people who could work, but were on welfare because many of them simply could not get hired for various reasons, including gaps in a resume and other things that cause people to not get hired.

It was not to end welfare in principle, but to make incentive based improvements in how Welfare Functions.

PRWORA instituted Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which became effective July 1, 1997. TANF replaced the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program—which had been in effect since 1935—and supplanted the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training program (JOBS) of 1988. The law was heralded as a "reassertion of America's work ethic" by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, largely in response to the bill's workfare component. TANF was reauthorized in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005.

The bill did not go far enough. It should have eliminated State and Federal Taxes on the participants for 5 yrs, while not placing any cap on earning that would trigger taxation within those 5 yrs. It should have provided mandatory health care at no cost, and allow housing assistance during the period for those at the lower income levels even with a corporate subsidy, or mandated a wage structure to be paid to those in the program, that was above poverty level wage, and it should have mandated companies to increase the wage to 40% above minimum wage. Because everyone knows minimum wage is no higher than the basic cost to house and feed a slave, with substandard conditions in every category of life and living cost.
It should have created a program where "those receiving Section 8 assistance, could get home loans at 2-3% based on an adjusted housing cost standard, to repopulate declining communities with vested homeowners. with a mandate they cannot sell or borrow against the home for 5-7 yrs and stipulate that the home must be maintained to HUD housing quality standards.

It should have been designed to "invest wisely" and to be done wisely, it has to consider a multitude of variables, to build sustainability for the individual, which in turn build sustainability for the communities and the cities.

Since the Nixon and Reagan Era all we've seen is declining communities and whole cities decimated into decline. Not because of the people, but because of Political policy, that designed corporate program policies which benefited companies to leave communities, and benefited banks to leave communities and allowed the Real Estate system to escalate retail values but not increase the property tax base with the market valuation increase.


What they did was patch a spot or two on rusty barrel, which put pressure on another rusting section of the barrel, that sprang yet another leak, and the more they patch one leak, the more new leaks sprang, rather than simply re-case the contents of the barrel in a new barrel, that was less prone to leaking.

[redguitar77111]

I wonder what effects abolishing welfare would have on voting patterns.

Originally Posted by Chance and Change

What kind of crazy question is that!!! Questions like this Exemplify, why Republican mentality is simply an evil atrocity in America...

It's something that Gingrich was talking about, not something I personally believe in.