Welfare handouts (unemployment, illegal, drug, regular)

[afoigrokerkok]

Do you think our government should provide handouts to those who cannot work, do not make enough to support themselves and their families, or simply choose not to work? What about to those who have been laid off?

Should the government reward women for repeatedly having children as a means of getting more benefits...or do we have an obligation to provide the benefits for the sake of the kids?

I'm interested to hear everyone's thoughts. Under what circumstances do you think handouts are acceptable, if any? And what type of assistance should be provided?

[Rhenzanite]

I'm torn on the issue. On one hand, I think if you are laid off due to no fault of your own it might be nice to get unemployment. I know it sure helped me for 3 months a few years back when I got laid off. Disability is in the same boat (I know it's 'insurance'). I was on doctor ordered disability for 7 months last year and it helped me recover from a blood infection.

On the other hand, there are MANY people who abuse welfare. I see it every day, people who get food stamps, welfare and section 8 but work under the table and make more than I do. Families that shop at grocery stores and use their EBT card to purchase snack foods and sodas, then go outside and get in their giant SUV with chrome rims.

I just think there should be a lot more restrictions and more of a screening process for any type of handout.

[2mares]

Our government dosent provide handouts. That assistance is our tax dollars. I read somewhere that welfare makes up about 2% of gov. expendatures, I dont know if that is correct, but I would rather see money go to help provide for the people than say these giant bail outs and foregin aid and $200 toliet seats.

You and your employer pay into unemployment, so yes if you have worked for years and are laid off, you should get some of that money back to get you thru the hump. But the way the gov. figures it you must have worked certain months of certain years.

As far as welfare abuse that is the gov. fault. I've worked in gov. hand out programs before and it is mismanagement and total lack of logic in procedure and guidelines.

[stormy night]

As far as welfare, there should be caps so more children won't = more money or benefits. That would curb that population really fast. It should cover no more than 1 parent and 2 kids.

Any two parent family should have at least one parent working somewhere, doing something.

Jetjockey is right, a huge number of families on welfare or disability work under the table and make a LOT of money. That's called fraud. It should be illegal and prosecuted.

Unemployment should be absolute. With the economy the way it is; with outsourcing and downsizing, and closures, people who making honest livings need to be able to make ends meet until they can find other work.

For the sake of the kids? THAT should be considered when a female lays down with a male to make them. It's not everybody else's job to take care of kids who are spit out one after the other as cash cows for their mothers.

If a woman is on welfare and gets pregnant, she shouldn't get any more money or benefits. Let HER worry about how to take care of extra kids.

[jtur88]

We are withholding a means lf livelihood from people for whom there is no job. What sense does that make? We prove every day that there are more people than the number of workers that are required to produce all the goods and services required by the entire nation. Most of the chronically unemployed, if they are forced to go to a work site, contribute no productive labor, and probably even disrupt the shop, and force other people who could be productive to waste their time supervising, training or reprimanding them.

[kb09]

Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok

Do you think our government should provide handouts to those who cannot work, do not make enough to support themselves and their families, or simply choose not to work? What about to those who have been laid off?

Should the government reward women for repeatedly having children as a means of getting more benefits...or do we have an obligation to provide the benefits for the sake of the kids?

I'm interested to hear everyone's thoughts. Under what circumstances do you think handouts are acceptable, if any? And what type of assistance should be provided?

I think we should restrict (and cut) welfare; both at the bottom AND the top. No more bailout for companies that should die anyway, no more corporate welfare (who abuse it more than anyone on food stamps, disability, etc. do), and we need to levy tough restrictions on welfare.

[afoigrokerkok]

Some good thoughts so far...

My personal opinion:

1. Disability criteria needs to be tightened. Someone who has a severe enough disability that they absolutely cannot work at all should be eligible for benefits. Someone who cannot work very much should be eligible for reduced benefits if they work as much as they can. If I understand correctly, there are tons of people out there on disability who shouldn't be.

2. If an unmarried woman receiving any type of welfare has already had two children, she should be required to be sterilized as a condition of any additional benefits. Another option would be to simply start taking kids away if parents are making no effort to provide for them.

3. Unemployment needs to be limited to relatively short periods. Ideally, I'd like to see a system where employers stop paying into a separate unemployment fund and benefits are simply provided through regular taxes.

4. Drug testing must be required as a condition of receiving ANY type of benefits.

5. There needs to be more investigation to ensure that people receiving benefits are not working under the table. If they are, they need to be punished severely.

As far as corporate welfare and bailing out companies, that would create a lot of people who are unemployed. Long-term it may work out, but short-term it would cause a disaster. I'm not sure how to solve that.

[Fat Freddy]

I am opposed to any government giveaway programs unless I can get some of it.

[kb09]

Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok

Some good thoughts so far...

My personal opinion:

1. Disability criteria needs to be tightened. Someone who has a severe enough disability that they absolutely cannot work at all should be eligible for benefits. Someone who cannot work very much should be eligible for reduced benefits if they work as much as they can. If I understand correctly, there are tons of people out there on disability who shouldn't be.

2. If an unmarried woman receiving any type of welfare has already had two children, she should be required to be sterilized as a condition of any additional benefits. Another option would be to simply start taking kids away if parents are making no effort to provide for them.

3. Unemployment needs to be limited to relatively short periods. Ideally, I'd like to see a system where employers stop paying into a separate unemployment fund and benefits are simply provided through regular taxes.

4. Drug testing must be required as a condition of receiving ANY type of benefits.

5. There needs to be more investigation to ensure that people receiving benefits are not working under the table. If they are, they need to be punished severely.

As far as corporate welfare and bailing out companies, that would create a lot of people who are unemployed. Long-term it may work out, but short-term it would cause a disaster. I'm not sure how to solve that.

I agree with your points but I think we should just completely cut out corporate welfare. All of what we are doing right now is holding off the pain (and adding to it in the process) thinking that we can spend our way out of a recession, out of debt, and out of all our worries. There is no easy way to lose jobs; you just have to bite it by the bullet and get it over as quickly as possible. Holding off the hurt is not going to do anything but make the hurt just that much worse when it does occur.

[MarqueseGilmore]

Originally Posted by JetJockey

I'm torn on the issue. On one hand, I think if you are laid off due to no fault of your own it might be nice to get unemployment. I know it sure helped me for 3 months a few years back when I got laid off. Disability is in the same boat (I know it's 'insurance'). I was on doctor ordered disability for 7 months last year and it helped me recover from a blood infection.

On the other hand, there are MANY people who abuse welfare. I see it every day, people who get food stamps, welfare and section 8 but work under the table and make more than I do. Families that shop at grocery stores and use their EBT card to purchase snack foods and sodas, then go outside and get in their giant SUV with chrome rims.

I just think there should be a lot more restrictions and more of a screening process for any type of handout.

I feel like everyone has the right to the american dream but when you abuse the help then you don't deserve help. Is welfare a handout? I don't think so. Is welfare abused?yeah and no. I'm not going to generalize and clump the bad seeds with the good apples. I think that welfare should be limited only to those who are disabled or elderly. NOW there IS a such thing as vocational retardation meaning you don't have the skills to get a job that feeds yourself and your children. IN that case there should be temporary welfare and the person should be supplied training and schooling and should be cut off once he/she completes training. As far as the bold statement above,I believe that your statement was racially motivated and I believe that people can buy what they want with their EBT....As long as the children arent going without.