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.
No, what I see is how programs exist in reality and the demographic statistics of the recipients.
In the case of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) besides a total life time benefit level of 60 month per family, there is a mandatory work/training component. Sorry but lazy mom and dad are in the workforce or at the very least attempting to enter it.
In the case of Supplemental Social Security, the payments are for children 1,199.788 suffer from severe disabilities. Are they suppose to get off their butts and get a job? Are adults with severe disabilities suppose to get up off their butts and get a job as well? What about the 6,582,261 blind and disabled recipients of SSI who DO work yet require additional subsidies?
How do you know that these children are severely disabled. I have a nephew who receives SSI, he is not severely disabled. He has some speech and behavioral issues (both of which I believe could have been helped with adequate parenting by his mom and my brother, his dad). He goes to a special school now and gets speech therapy and is doing much better but my brother and his mom get SSI for his "disabilities." When I asked the reason for his disability and why he gets SSI, they said because he has asthma. Mind you, they are probably lying as I have a feeling he is on the autism spectrum and they are just too embarrassed to admit but, but they already get food stamps, daycare assistance, Medicaid, and social services related to my nephews special needs. He lives with both parents and they purposefully are not married since my brother makes 50K a year and they would not qualify for assistance if they were married. They don't want to give up food stamps and Medicaid specifically.
Also, I used to work with people who are blind doing customer service. Just because you are blind doesn't mean you can't work and like a PP said, there is nothing wrong with helping the severely disabled, but paying people who can actually work is only draining money away from those who truly need it and away from other areas that could use that money.
I guess that explains why poverty in this county has DECLINED IN THE LAST 50 YEARS. In fact the the long term trend in poverty was declining until 2001. Since 2001 we have seen an increase in the overall poverty rate. But it's still substantually lower than it was 50 years ago.
Yes, but the poverty rate bottomed out in 1974, when marriage rates started dropping, probably due to the Oil crisis. But notice this, black people have the the lowest marriage rate, they have 70%+ of their babies born out of wedlock and the lowest % of their children being raised by married two parent households and they have the highest poverty rate, with the lowest average incomes.
Married couple households have a poverty rate of 8.3% as of 2009, while female-headed households have a poverty rate of 38.5%.
http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/charts/view/170 (broken link)
How do you know that these children are severely disabled. I have a nephew who receives SSI, he is not severely disabled. He has some speech and behavioral issues (both of which I believe could have been helped with adequate parenting by his mom and my brother, his dad). He goes to a special school now and gets speech therapy and is doing much better but my brother and his mom get SSI for his "disabilities." When I asked the reason for his disability and why he gets SSI, they said because he has asthma. Mind you, they are probably lying as I have a feeling he is on the autism spectrum and they are just too embarrassed to admit but, but they already get food stamps, daycare assistance, Medicaid, and social services related to my nephews special needs. He lives with both parents and they purposefully are not married since my brother makes 50K a year and they would not qualify for assistance if they were married. They don't want to give up food stamps and Medicaid specifically.
Also, I used to work with people who are blind doing customer service. Just because you are blind doesn't mean you can't work and like a PP said, there is nothing wrong with helping the severely disabled, but paying people who can actually work is only draining money away from those who truly need it and away from other areas that could use that money.
When I worked for a call center in Dallas we had 3 blind reservation reps. They had brail computers. I am not saying this will always work, but you are right, these were adults that wanted to help themselves. Did they still get some assistance? Sure and no one would have ever denied them that, but for the most part they were self sufficeint.
I think its very naive and laughable to think that if you cut off welfare the former recipients will start working and turn their ghettos into middle-class communities, and there are many people on this thread who've expressed this opinion. Although some people might do that, many of the able bodied people who don't pursue educations or trades and simply take advantage of the welfare system because they are lazy would only turn to crime like drug dealing, armed robbery and prostitution if their welfare checks were all of a sudden taken away. Anyone with even the most remote desire to "work hard to improve themselves and their situation", as one person on this thread implied they would do, is already trying to do that. Now I'm not saying this is a legitimate reason for the welfare system, because its not. But lets not be naive and say all of the welfare junkies would jump up from their couch and all of a sudden try to find legitimate gainful employment if their welfare was cut off.
Yes, but the poverty rate bottomed out in 1974, when marriage rates started dropping, probably due to the Oil crisis. But notice this, black people have the the lowest marriage rate, they have 70%+ of their babies born out of wedlock and the lowest % of their children being raised by married two parent households and they have the highest poverty rate, with the lowest average incomes.
Married couple households have a poverty rate of 8.3% as of 2009, while female-headed households have a poverty rate of 38.5%.
Poverty dramatically higher for single mothers | State of Working America (http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/charts/view/170 - broken link)
Have you also notice the poverty rate among Black Americans declined 50% in the last 50 years? Have you also noticed that in the last 50 year on a numerical basis the number of Black Ameerican living below the poverty level increase by less than 10% while the population of Black Americans MORE THAN DOUBLED.
Also
Report: Shifting African-American Population (http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/report-shifting-african-american-population-114439 - broken link)
Quote:
Black households making $75,000-plus have increased 47 percent in the last five years—1.5 times faster than the general population.
If current trends continue, by 2015 more than half of all black Americans will live in the suburbs.
Which leads to believe two things you are either woefully uninformed about the demographics in regards to Black Americans or you have a bias. Most Black Americans are NOT POOR and most DON'T LIVE IN GHETTOS!
I think its very naive and laughable to think that if you cut off welfare the former recipients will start working and turn their ghettos into middle-class communities, and there are many people on this thread who've expressed this opinion. Although some people might do that, many of the able bodied people who don't pursue educations or trades and simply take advantage of the welfare system because they are lazy would only turn to crime like drug dealing, armed robbery and prostitution if their welfare checks were all of a sudden taken away. Anyone with even the most remote desire to "work hard to improve themselves and their situation", as one person on this thread implied they would do, is already trying to do that. Now I'm not saying this is a legitimate reason for the welfare system, because its not. But lets not be naive and say all of the welfare junkies would jump up from their couch and all of a sudden try to find legitimate gainful employment if their welfare was cut off.
We could build a wall around them then dump in cement like Chernobyl .
Have you also notice the poverty rate among Black Americans declined 50% in the last 50 years? Have you also noticed that in the last 50 year on a numerical basis the number of Black American living below the poverty level increase by less than 10% while the population of Black Americans MORE THAN DOUBLED.
Also
Report: Shifting African-American Population (http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/report-shifting-african-american-population-114439 - broken link)
Which leads to believe two things you are either woefully uninformed about the demographics in regards to Black Americans or you have a bias. Most Black Americans are NOT POOR and most DON'T LIVE IN GHETTOS!
The article said almost half don't live in the Ghettos . So more than half do .
I think its very naive and laughable to think that if you cut off welfare the former recipients will start working and turn their ghettos into middle-class communities, and there are many people on this thread who've expressed this opinion. Although some people might do that, many of the able bodied people who don't pursue educations or trades and simply take advantage of the welfare system because they are lazy would only turn to crime like drug dealing, armed robbery and prostitution if their welfare checks were all of a sudden taken away. Anyone with even the most remote desire to "work hard to improve themselves and their situation", as one person on this thread implied they would do, is already trying to do that. Now I'm not saying this is a legitimate reason for the welfare system, because its not. But lets not be naive and say all of the welfare junkies would jump up from their couch and all of a sudden try to find legitimate gainful employment if their welfare was cut off.
People will game the system if there is an opportunity to do so. This is an established fact. Look at all of the "tax-evaders", they will play the system any way they can. Yes, if you limit welfare to the elderly and disabled, some able-bodied people will get jobs and some will become drug dealers. But either way, I won't be subsidizing their existence with my tax money.
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.
