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.
I don't think anyone who goes to work everyday, Republican OR Democrat, likes the idea of someone sitting at home all day while the government sends them checks. But it isn't that easy to turn it off. What about the people who do really need it and aren't abusing it? How are you going to weed out those who are abusing it? You'd have to pay people a salary and benefits, expenses of setting up offices, etc. It won't be a snap of your fingers to put those people to work either. Who is going to want to hire them? College educated people can't find jobs. People can't get hired on at fast food joints... and say you want to put them to work doing community service...again you need offices, people to train them, supervise them, etc. There isn't any easy solution.
Last edited by strawberrykiki; 08-28-2012 at 01:35 PM..
Reason: typos
If 1% of welfare recipients were "healthy" adults capable of working, would you spend greater than the amount they receive total to remove them from welfare? For example, if it cost five million dollars in the state of Virginia to keep 1% of its welfare population who otherwise does not qualify (say they lied on their forms or something), or would cost eight million dollars to research the abusers and instill a system which keeps them off, would you pay for it?
In the short term I'd clamp down on the requirements and make it harder for people to get on to. In the medium term I'd start cutting people off it after a certain amount of time on welfare and root out fraudsters and moochs. In the long term I'd end welfare.
The issue isn’t keeping the undeserving off. It is to create an economy that allows all who want to work, the opportunity to do so at a rate far above what any minimum welfare affords.
In the short term I'd clamp down on the requirements and make it harder for people to get on to. In the medium term I'd start cutting people off it after a certain amount of time on welfare and root out fraudsters and moochs. In the long term I'd end welfare.
How? People lie on their applications and find ways to get around the requirements all the time. How are you going to pay the salaries of the people you hire to find out who is lying? Monitoring welfare and rooting out fraud would be a HUGE undertaking requiring a lot of people working non stop. There are always going to be people who refuse to work. Welfare will never totally end. This is America. We aren't going to let all those people starve in the street.
I would not. I don't think the level of abuse is very significant at all.
The level of abuse of all government programs is astronomical including welfare, unemployment, corporate subsidies and many many other hand outs. Get your head out of the sand.
But the Republicans claim that a majority of Americans WANT this to happen...that only an entrenched 'minority of welfare leeches' like the present system.
The level of abuse of all government programs is astronomical including welfare, unemployment, corporate subsidies and many many other hand outs. Get your head out of the sand.
Ok...why won't the House Republicans pass a bill today (that won't pass the Senate) to end welfare this fiscal year, and that starting Oct. 1st, no more welfare checks will be passed out. Why?
Let them get on record. I'm not interested in what you Republican acolytes say because you know your legislators will NEVER end the entitlements....that's why you guys talk it to death.
You're missing the overall picture here, getting people off welfare is not the goal. Putting them into jobs is the goal.
Exactly! Here I was thinking that we might actually have a worthy topic of discussion, paying more for real job training, placement and support to paraphrase a portion of a Bill Cosby speech on the dedication of a new low income housing development, "get them in, get them up, and get them out!" But instead we get another hair brained suggestion to build yet another layer of bureaucracy instead of getting funding to where it is needed.
Ok...why won't the House Republicans pass a bill today (that won't pass the Senate) to end welfare this fiscal year, and that starting Oct. 1st, no more welfare checks will be passed out. Why?
Let them get on record. I'm not interested in what you Republican acolytes say because you know your legislators will NEVER end the entitlements....that's why you guys talk it to death.
Nobody will because of exactly what was screamed about Ryan who is about the only guy who even mentions doing something about social security or medicaid or whatever. The other side starts running around squealing and crying and lying sayin how they want to kill old people and starve children and on and on. That is why nobody does it because it would be political suicide. That is exactly why you would salivate over anyone going on record, any republican of course, then you could scream far and wide with the rest of the lunatics who would rather watch the boat sink than put the plug in. It's complete and utter insanity.
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.
