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.
probably, I am limited by the size of this phone, often keep it brief. Public assistance is and should be the last safety net. Gotta be there, but maybe reform could include deductions to government assistance when you receive charitable assistance instead, either/or not both.
With the trend to allow people to pick and choose who they help, the last safety net has to be there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glasvegas
Some made a very elaborate and detailed point along those lines earlier in the thread. I also believe that private charities are too much of a "variable" to be relied upon to prevent millions of people from slipping into absolute poverty. Charitable donations are selective and donations tend to go towards the more "popular" charities. If a certain demographic becomes unpopular because of racism or any other form of prejudice, many prolly will simply refuse to donate to charities collecting on their behalf, while other more popular charities may find themselves flooded with cash.
Too much of a variable, whereas the welfare system does not discriminate. I would rather see sweeping welfare reforms and perhaps the system tinkered to help people learn new skills, gain qualifications and get back to work, rather than just mailing them a check every month. I think that most of us can agree that welfare should be a hand up, not a way of life and that we should seek to crack down on fraud and abuse, just as with any government program.
I would like to see an example of country here in 2011 that has virtually no welfare system, that doesn't have severe poverty, even if that country is doing well, economically.
The fact is the War on Poverty stopped a decline in the poverty rate. Subsidize illegitimacy and sloth and you end up with more poverty.
you failed to establish any correlation between the great society programs and the halt in the decline in poverty. Any other economic factor could be the cause, the end of the war in Nam with all those troops coming home to no jobs is far more likely the cause.
Neat chart though, it would be even better with the presidents superimosed, that would indicate that reagun, bush and the gop policies hurt the poor.
you failed to establish any correlation between the great society programs and the halt in the decline in poverty. Any other economic factor could be the cause, the end of the war in Nam with all those troops coming home to no jobs is far more likely the cause.
Poverty is higher than ever. More babies are born into welfare programs today, and even millions of immigrants are coming to get in on these cash cows. People are pouring over the borders to be poor in the USA because no where else do the poor live so very very well.
Viet Nam vets aren't having all kinds of babies in order to collect food stamps, Medicaid.
In fact the majority of welfare recipients are able bodied, very healthy, so healthy they are having babies at higher rates than working people.
"Private charities should replace welfare" (discuss)
People getting off their asses and getting a job should replace welfare.
The elderly and the truly disabled should get government assistance. No able-bodied person should ever see a dime. Between private charities, their family, and their own gumption, they should be able to get by.
People don't want to acknowledge the ugly, politically incorrect truth that most people are like any animal in the animal kingdom. The path of least resistance and least energy expenditure will always outweigh pride or even better judgment. As long as welfare is available, that will be the fastest growing group (and fastest breeding group) in our country.
People don't want to acknowledge the ugly, politically incorrect truth that most people are like any animal in the animal kingdom. The path of least resistance and least energy expenditure will always outweigh pride or even better judgment. As long as welfare is available, that will be the fastest growing group (and fastest breeding group) in our country.
We sowed it...now we're reaping it.
In many regions of the country now, like the one I live in, more babies are being born into welfare programs than not.
It's absurd that anyone would believe this is a sustainable situation.
Poverty is higher than ever. More babies are born into welfare programs today, and even millions of immigrants are coming to get in on these cash cows. People are pouring over the borders to be poor in the USA because no where else do the poor live so very very well.
Viet Nam vets aren't having all kinds of babies in order to collect food stamps, Medicaid.
In fact the majority of welfare recipients are able bodied, very healthy, so healthy they are having babies at higher rates than working people.
TRY READING FOR COMPREHEND. THE FOCUS OF THE CHART, AND MY REPLY, CONCERNED THE BOGUS CLAIM THAT THE GREAT SOCIETY PROGRAMS INCREASED POVERTY IN THE EARLY 1970'S. that is a bogus claim, gop policies caused more poverty,impose the prez's terms on the chart and you can see, poverty up for gop prez's, down for dem's.
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.
