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.
So many people abuse welfare and we can't expect the government to evaluate welfare applicants on a case-by-case basis.
Why don't we make it so that each person has to justify their need for welfare and let people decide who they want to help? Then people couldn't complain about their money being wasted on leeches because it only goes to who ever they think needs it.
This seems like it would be much less prone to abuse than just dumping trillions of dollars into a pool of money that just goes to anyone that decides they don't feel like working anymore.
Some people are already using GoFundMe of financial help. And I'm sure the GoFundMe fees would be far less than the overhead of the IRS and social services.
So many people abuse welfare and we can't expect the government to evaluate welfare applicants on a case-by-case basis.
Why don't we make it so that each person has to justify their need for welfare and let people decide who they want to help? Then people couldn't complain about their money being wasted on leeches because it only goes to who ever they think needs it.
This seems like it would be much less prone to abuse than just dumping trillions of dollars into a pool of money that just goes to anyone that decides they don't feel like working anymore.
Some people are already using GoFundMe of financial help. And I'm sure the GoFundMe fees would be far less than the overhead of the IRS and social services.
Maybe you just set welfare users adrift on an iceberg and save GoFundMe for important things like raising money to open a Subway franchise.
So many people abuse welfare and we can't expect the government to evaluate welfare applicants on a case-by-case basis.
Why don't we make it so that each person has to justify their need for welfare and let people decide who they want to help? Then people couldn't complain about their money being wasted on leeches because it only goes to who ever they think needs it.
This seems like it would be much less prone to abuse than just dumping trillions of dollars into a pool of money that just goes to anyone that decides they don't feel like working anymore.
Some people are already using GoFundMe of financial help. And I'm sure the GoFundMe fees would be far less than the overhead of the IRS and social services.
Better solution: Get welfare down to a local level. Have the state and federal provide oversight things to stop corruption or any bad behavior, but that should be their only role. If my family needs help, how can somebody in Washington DC or Springfield (in my case) know it? How do they know I'm real? How do they know that I'm not just taking a free ride on the system? Simple fact is they don't. But if you push it down to the local level then you're putting it in the hands of people who can legitimately know:
1.) If the person actually needs help. There are so many ways to defraud the system, but if you know the family personally, then that gets a lot harder. Example: Many couples won't marry so the non-working partner can continue to stay on welfare while the other is making a healthy income.
2.) Specifically what their needs are -- so no "one size fits all" solutions. For example, some families have piles and piles of cold cereal on their shelves, most of which will ultimately go to waste because that's what the one-size-fits-all of WIC tells them they need.
3.) They can check in with the person regularly to see if they really are trying to help themselves.
4.) Local officials can look at the family's finances and provide financial counselling to help root out bad financial decision-making -- which would clear out a ton of people from the welfare roles.
5.) By running it locally, you're actually close enough to recipients that you can actually make them work for what they get until they're off welfare.
None of the above can be done by programs that are run from the far-distant ivory tower in Washington DC.
Having a safety net to help people is ultimately a good thing. Trouble is, our safety net is getting ripped off to the tune of billions of dollars every year.
No. Get rid of both. Total ridiculousness.
Both boil my blood.
The concept of welfare is great, I actually support the original intent.
Unfortunately it has transformed into a career for many lazy and useless skells and derelicts.
Reform this crap and enforce the laws and regulations and let it benefit those that truly need and deserve it.
Gofundme and similar crap?
**** off. Get a job. Earn that crap on your own.
If it is a situation to help someone truly in need hold a community fund drive or something.
To those who say we should get rid of all welfare, I agree. But liberals are never going to agree to that. I see something like this as the only compromise that both parties could ever agree to.
This way, we give liberals a chance to put their money where their mouth is. I bet welfare wouldn't last much longer when they are forced to enter that dollar amount of money that's about to come out of their income. Or when they are forced to ask themselves "does this person really deserve it"?
Well, it's unlikely that many liberals would voluntarily part with their own money. They prefer spending other people's money. Studies have proven this.
So many people abuse welfare and we can't expect the government to evaluate welfare applicants on a case-by-case basis.
Why don't we make it so that each person has to justify their need for welfare and let people decide who they want to help? Then people couldn't complain about their money being wasted on leeches because it only goes to who ever they think needs it.
This seems like it would be much less prone to abuse than just dumping trillions of dollars into a pool of money that just goes to anyone that decides they don't feel like working anymore.
Some people are already using GoFundMe of financial help. And I'm sure the GoFundMe fees would be far less than the overhead of the IRS and social services.
Your entire premise is NOT based on reality.
" and we can't expect the government to evaluate welfare applicants on a case-by-case basis."
But, THAT is EXACTLY how they get welfare. You sit down with a live government employee, fill out he forms.
Those forms are EVALUATE INDIVIDUALLY.
"Why don't we make it so that each person has to justify their need for welfare and let people decide who they want to help?"
Who are "the people"?
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.
