Mich. governor signs 48-month welfare limit

[seekerz]

There is no reason for grain to rot or be eaten by rats in warehouses and on docks.

There is plenty of food on this planet to feed the whole planet. Droughts, etc. in the US have not caused Americans to go hungry.

allafrica.com/stories/201101120588.html

Read more: foxnews.com/world/2011/03/30/eritrea-aid-shove/#ixzz1XUIcThO6

Now you’re getting into the real causes of poverty: political instability, poor or absent (rather than ‘big’) government, imposition of external solutions that do not address local realities, temporary bandaids as opposed to problem-solving, lack of accountability (both locally and by international agencies) and on and on.

For example, it might sound simple: there’s excess food here and not enough there, so send some…the result might not be as straighforward because though stomachs might be temporarily filled (a good thing in a crisis), in the long run this approach might cripple local agricultural markets and lead to long-term dependence on external aid.

A permanent solution to hunger includes needy countries being able to develop their markets and being enabled to become competitive in world trade. That is hardly likely to happen without some concessionary treatment. While many developed countries subscribe to this idea (at least theoretically), actual trade practices seem to resemble more the ‘survival of the fittest’ rough and tumble of the free market.

Another consideration is that despite loads of international assistance, as much if not more money may flow in the opposite direction in the form of debt repayment by resource-poor countries or by those which have resources but still find it hard to compete on the world market. Of course, that is not to say these observations are true for all developing countries (vital statistics for Nigeria are hardly impressive despite the presence of oil, for example).

My point is, this is hardly simply all about ‘big’ government, unless you are referring to ‘world government’.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Now you’re getting into the real causes of poverty: political instability, poor or absent (rather than ‘big’) government, imposition of external solutions that do not address local realities, temporary bandaids as opposed to problem-solving, lack of accountability (both locally and by international agencies) and on and on.

For example, it might sound simple: there’s excess food here and not enough there, so send some…the result might not be as straighforward because though stomachs might be temporarily filled (a good thing in a crisis), in the long run this approach might cripple local agricultural markets and lead to long-term dependence on external aid.

A permanent solution to hunger includes needy countries being able to develop their markets and being enabled to become competitive in world trade. That is hardly likely to happen without some concessionary treatment. While many developed countries subscribe to this idea (at least theoretically), actual trade practices seem to resemble more the ‘survival of the fittest’ rough and tumble of the free market.

Another consideration is that despite loads of international assistance, as much if not more money may flow in the opposite direction in the form of debt repayment by resource-poor countries or by those which have resources but still find it hard to compete on the world market. Of course, that is not to say these observations are true for all developing countries (vital statistics for Nigeria are hardly impressive despite the presence of oil, for example).

My point is, this is hardly simply all about ‘big’ government, unless you are referring to ‘world government’.

Far better put than I am capable of. And definitely evidence that it is not solely governments that cause poverty and famine.

 

[seekerz]

Far better put than I am capable of. And definitely evidence that it is not solely governments that cause poverty and famine.

Thanks Rich. I have found that the only way to overcome supposition and widely held logical-sounding but inaccurate assumptions, is by actually researching the realities on the ground.

 

[buffalo]

Government is part of the problem, not the solution.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Government is part of the problem, not the solution.

Well if that’s not a mathematical proof of the argument, then I just don’t know what is.

 

[Daizies]

Sounds like you live on the moon, Daizies. Around here, our poor live in the lap of luxury - off the stolen wealth of hardworking people. On our planet, this travesty is what has supplanted the glory days of perfectly adequate Church-run charity.

I don’t live on the moon just not in the USA. And here, welfare money has to cover everything including rent, food and transportation. The only additional thing covered is essential medical needs. There is subsidized housing in certain areas, but it is very restrictive, and has about a 2 year waiting list. And if you have a criminal record, don’t even bother applying.
So let me see if I have this correct: You give them money, free housing, and food stamps too? If everything is handed to people on a silver platter, no wonder there is such a problem.

 

[seekerz]

I don’t live on the moon just not in the USA. And here, welfare money has to cover everything including rent, food and transportation. The only additional thing covered is essential medical needs. There is subsidized housing in certain areas, but it is very restrictive, and has about a 2 year waiting list. And if you have a criminal record, don’t even bother applying.
So let me see if I have this correct: You give them money, free housing, and food stamps too? If everything is handed to people on a silver platter, no wonder there is such a problem.

I was being sarcastic and for that I apologize. No, everything is not handed to people on a silver platter, regardless of what you read around here. The problem is that (as with everything else in our economy) there are people who try to milk the system instead of working hard for what they need.

This is not a phenomenon restricted to people on assistance - it exists in every sphere: from business to medicine. People are very creative and sometimes that creativity is put to nefarious uses; the business world for example, though filled with opportunity is also peppered with people who never tire of scheming to come up with ways (legal or illegal) of parting you with you money while giving as little of a real product/service as they can fool you into accepting. Does that mean that all business people are crooked? Of course not.

Similarly, just because some (or even many) take unfair advantage of government assistance does not mean that the programs are bad (or even comparatively badly run)? It just means that government needs to put human creativity to work outwitting the nefarious creativity at work in the opposite direction. Make the programs more efficient, enforce reasonable guidelines, enlist the general public in fighting fraud, provide training in financial management (which tons of people lack, not just the poor) and job skills etc.

The problem is the tendency to generalize based on our personal observations (sometimes without the necessary detailed facts) and to demonize all welfare recipients based on the actions of some. From my personal experience, Church charity can be similarly appropriated by people who are not needy, but to hear some tell it, that’s the solution to the evils of ‘big government’.

To a certain extent I can understand - we all have not had the same life experiences. I have seen places where overseas aid directed at individual sponsored children end up being used for the general upkeep of those channeling the aid and where donated religious tracts get sold in bundles to roadside vendors (as fuel for their wood-burning stoves). Mismanagement and dishonesty can happen with every type of program (government-run or otherwise). We just need to be vigilant and realistic.

 

[February]

I haven’t read all the posts, but as a Catholic therapist/social worker in Michigan (doing home based work in Detroit and throughout Wayne County) I felt the need to chime in.

First, I don’t think I read it here, but numerous responses in Detroit newspapers have accused this welfare limit of “taking milk from babies”. This measure limits cash assistance only–not food stamps (bridge cards), WIC, child daycare subsidies, or disability. The limit applies only to people who have been deemed eligible for Work First; basically meaning these are able-bodied people who can work.

Second, I have seen the ins and outs of “the system” in my 8+ years of doing home visits. Some examples: 1) A 20-year-old client comments that someone she knows receives a lot of money on her bridge card and that the person “must be doing something good” to get that much money. It is then explained to her that this person doesn’t work, but is receiving welfare. Same client recently asks me for resources for money; I suggest a part-time job. She says that her disability (which previous workers helped her fake in order to get money from her check) will be cut if she works. I say it won’t and hand her information about working while on disability. She thinks about it and has become inspired to get a part-time job and/or go back to school; I’m sure nobody ever told her that she could work and earn and be proud of herself. I’m trying my best to help her with independence.

1. Another client with 5 children (gets disability for two of them) informs me that she is one of the people being cut. I ask her how much she currently receives ($250-300). I tell her she could be making more with a job; she agrees and states she could make more than that in a week if she applies herself. I encourage her and offer job help. She’s participating in our employment program.
2. Numerous stories of selling food stamps for cash. Client #1 recently states that her food assistance was increased, and so she would sell them. I tell her it’s illegal and that she should tell her worker if she doesn’t need that much. Numerous stories of people trying to get their children diagnosed with a disability so they can receive the money. Numerous stories of people not looking for jobs while on unemployment; another client wanting to “get fired” so she could get unemployment, too.
3. Some people that are legitimately needing assistance and being denied (homeless and hungry with a child; another with children that recently lost their father), while others that know how to “work the system” are selling their benefits and basically sitting at home collecting money.

In summary, something has to be done. I think the greatest tragedy is the acceptance that one will always need welfare, will always be behind on bills at the end of the month, and will always be dependent on others for money. Helping people achieve independence and boosting their self-esteem should be the real goal.

 

[Trader]

Sure, they stopped the rain, they poured salt on the soil, they caused the lack of agricultural jobs, they denied people food. You Republicans just amaze me.

Just checking. Is it a personal attack to call someone a Republican?

 

[seekerz]

Helping people achieve independence and boosting their self-esteem should be the real goal.

Well said, and God bless you in your work.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Just checking. Is it a personal attack to call someone a Republican?

Next time somebody cuts me off (or rather since I don’t own a car, almost runs me over) I’ll shout “you son of a Republican!” at him, and see how he reacts. That’ll tell for sure.

 

[MissRose73]

This is one thing I actually agree with the governor on and I’ve rarely agreed with things he’s done.

Welfare and similar items should be a short term thing not a long term/life time thing unless you are elderly or proven you cannot work due to a disability/illness. There are too many people out there simply taking advantage of the system who refuse to even take a job in places like retail, restaurant or a call center.