Poke holes in my Social Welfare Idea

[RCIAGraduate]

Would it be a good idea if we readjusted the current structure of our social welfare programs to emphasize transitional assistance, in order focus on poverty alleviation rather than relief and incentivize the poor and low-income into moving towards the working-class. For instance, some ideas could include.

• Tweaking the Earned Income Tax Credit to reward families that leave federal-poverty lines and other government guidelines that qualify them for social programs like Medicaid and Welfare.
• This is one I read about before (Thank you Corki) which is providing some sort of low-cost health insurance or even gap coverage(like S-CHIP) so families don’t need to be worried about them and or their children losing health coverage due to a bonus or raise.
• Ample provision of supports such as Transportation and Child Care Assistance to help families with employment and work.
• Maybe encouraging savings and asset-building. Rather than encouraging homeownership (and long-term debt) with government-backed loans, the government can encourage working class families to attain some measure of stability by providing a matched savings program such as Individual Development Accounts for various purposes such as education and training, forming a small business, home or simply even accounts for retirement or emergencies.

At the same time,the role of care and relief for the poor and indigent should be reemphasized towards charities, communities, and civil society as government steers towards a new strategy (attention,focus and emphasis on social mobility but Medicaid and Welfare would still exist)

P.S Thanks dmar198 for the title idea.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

You will be denounced as a racist.

 

[Mary_Estelle]

I think what you are advocating is a socialist government and they don’t work well. We are already on that road and things are not going well. How about bringing back some of the incentives from the depression days, but not make them long term. A lot of good came out of those programs Free enterprise is really the best way to move a country forward and we don’t have it anymore as everything is so over-regulated. My opinion only.

 

[57classic]

I think everybody who accepts government help, subsidies or what ever name the assistance goes by, should give up their right to vote until they have worked their way off assistance. It would solve the problem of Congress pandering to the votes of people who prefer to take from those who produce. I have personally witnessed able bodied men offering to show other able bodied persons how to get on government assistance. There was a time when there was shame attached to this.

30 years ago I was on welfare because I was suddenly a single mother receiving no child support. It took me 8 years of going to college, working 40 hours a week on nights and weekends, to work my way up to a job that paid enough to get off all assistance. Nothing I have ever done has given me as much satisfaction as telling the local welfare office I didn’t need them anymore. I was so happy and they were so nasty about it. Each of my children have had their struggles but they are now business owners, and home owners. That too gives me great satisfaction.

I don’t know how people who think everybody else owes them something can look in the mirror.

 

[Crusaderbear]

Too many practicing ‘generational welfare’. Tax breaks amount to what, maybe a few thousand dollars, collecting welfare may amount to tens of thousands.

Ben Franklin once said

“I am for doing good to the poor, but…I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed…that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

Eliminating poverty will be a painfilled process.

 

[57classic]

Too many practicing ‘generational welfare’. Tax breaks amount to what, maybe a few thousand dollars, collecting welfare may amount to tens of thousands.

Ben Franklin once said

“I am for doing good to the poor, but…I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed…that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

Eliminating poverty will be a painfilled process.

Jesus promised we would always have the poor with us so we won’t ever eliminate it all together.

The country needs to have a serious discussion on the definition of poverty. There are those families who don’t have STUFF but are working hard, putting aside money, paying their bills on time. They pass clothing down thru the family, they know how to cook to make the grocery dollar stretch, maybe they garden or are able to have chickens or livestock. They keep their utility bills in control. These people may be poor but they won’t always be poor.

On the other hand, there are other people who don’t care to learn how to budget or don’t practice it if they do know how. It isn’t important to them at all, somebody, somehow will come thru. The saying “Poor people have poor ways” comes to mind, the question is: do they want to make better choices or is “poor” is a choice they make in order to have time to do what ever they want instead of supporting themselves.

 

[Sarcelle]

You will be denounced as a racist.

Why?

 

[shockerfan]

Why?

There is sarcasm in the “racist” comment, but in today’s political environment, any cuts to social welfare programs will be viewed is disproportionately impacting people of color, thus will be called “racist”, despite the intention of the program. Getting people off welfare is a danger to maintaining a voting bloc of people dependent on the government.

 

[Sparkythedog]

I think everybody who accepts government help, subsidies or what ever name the assistance goes by, should give up their right to vote until they have worked their way off assistance. It would solve the problem of Congress pandering to the votes of people who prefer to take from those who produce. I have personally witnessed able bodied men offering to show other able bodied persons how to get on government assistance. There was a time when there was shame attached to this.

30 years ago I was on welfare because I was suddenly a single mother receiving no child support. It took me 8 years of going to college, working 40 hours a week on nights and weekends, to work my way up to a job that paid enough to get off all assistance. Nothing I have ever done has given me as much satisfaction as telling the local welfare office I didn’t need them anymore. I was so happy and they were so nasty about it. Each of my children have had their struggles but they are now business owners, and home owners. That too gives me great satisfaction.

I don’t know how people who think everybody else owes them something can look in the mirror.

Poor people have very little say in the government as it is. What you propose is a poverty restriction on having a voice in society which I’m pretty sure is unconstitutional. While there are some who may take advantage of the system many people rely on it to survive. You may have found a way out of poverty but that doesn’t mean that everyone else has the means or knowledge to do so.

If you want to help others get off government assistance why don’t you show them how you did it. Work to set up a program to lead people out of poverty. Give people the resources to achieve, don’t take away their rights and hope they’ll figure it out.

 

[on_the_hill]

Would it be a good idea if we readjusted the current structure of our social welfare programs to emphasize transitional assistance, in order focus on poverty alleviation rather than relief and incentivize the poor and low-income into moving towards the working-class. For instance, some ideas could include.

• Tweaking the Earned Income Tax Credit to reward families that leave federal-poverty lines and other government guidelines that qualify them for social programs like Medicaid and Welfare.
• This is one I read about before (Thank you Corki) which is providing some sort of low-cost health insurance or even gap coverage(like S-CHIP) so families don’t need to be worried about them and or their children losing health coverage due to a bonus or raise.
• Ample provision of supports such as Transportation and Child Care Assistance to help families with employment and work.
• Maybe encouraging savings and asset-building. Rather than encouraging homeownership (and long-term debt) with government-backed loans, the government can encourage working class families to attain some measure of stability by providing a matched savings program such as Individual Development Accounts for various purposes such as education and training, forming a small business, home or simply even accounts for retirement or emergencies.

At the same time,the role of care and relief for the poor and indigent should be reemphasized towards charities, communities, and civil society as government steers towards a new strategy (attention,focus and emphasis on social mobility but Medicaid and Welfare would still exist)

P.S Thanks dmar198 for the title idea.

A lot of these ideas are already established. Tweaking the EITC would probably be a good idea because there is a level where you’re worse off if your earnings go up.

I absolutely agree with doing something to help with transportation. It’s not necessarily the affordability of it, but the availability of it. If you’re taking evening classes and the last bus runs at 9PM, but you need to be in the computer lab longer than that, what do you do?

Individual development accounts is an interesting idea but how would they be funded? Most people who would need it are living paycheck to paycheck and don’t have the extra money to sock away.

 

[on_the_hill]

30 years ago I was on welfare because I was suddenly a single mother receiving no child support. It took me 8 years of going to college, working 40 hours a week on nights and weekends, to work my way up to a job that paid enough to get off all assistance. Nothing I have ever done has given me as much satisfaction as telling the local welfare office I didn’t need them anymore. I was so happy and they were so nasty about it. Each of my children have had their struggles but they are now business owners, and home owners. That too gives me great satisfaction.
r.

:clapping:

There are a whole lot of people out there who are trying to do exactly what you accomplished. But don’t you think taking away their voting rights is a bit draconian? Given that we struggle to get people to vote, that might just convince people that there’s no point in trying at all.

 

[shockerfan]

:clapping:

There are a whole lot of people out there who are trying to do exactly what you accomplished. But don’t you think taking away their voting rights is a bit draconian? Given that we struggle to get people to vote, that might just convince people that there’s no point in trying at all.

doesn’t there seem to be something a bit immoral about being able to vote yourself other people’s money?

 

[Sparkythedog]

doesn’t there seem to be something a bit immoral about being able to vote yourself other people’s money?

You have the same voting rights and options that the poor do. You can vote against welfare policies if you so choose.

If you think that it is easy or comfortable to live on welfare and state aid, I suggest you try it. It’s not a free ride and it’s often the only lifeline that keeps low income families and individuals from living on the street.

 

[shockerfan]

You have the same voting rights and options that the poor do. You can vote against welfare policies if you so choose.

If you think that it is easy or comfortable to live on welfare and state aid, I suggest you try it. It’s not a free ride and it’s often the only lifeline that keeps low income families and individuals from living on the street.

You really didn’t answer my question, but you did create a strawman argument attributing things to me I didn’t say or advocate.

 

[Sparkythedog]

You really didn’t answer my question, but you did create a strawman argument attributing things to me I didn’t say or advocate.

You asked about voting yourself other people’s money. This statement is technically not correct. State program funds are public, meaning that they are available to everyone who meets the set criteria for enrollment.

You seem to think its unfair that you can vote to enact programs that will benefit yourself. If that were the case we all should only be able to vote on programs designed to benefit people who aren’t us.

 

[57classic]

:clapping:

There are a whole lot of people out there who are trying to do exactly what you accomplished. But don’t you think taking away their voting rights is a bit draconian? Given that we struggle to get people to vote, that might just convince people that there’s no point in trying at all.

If they couldn’t vote, the politicians would not be falling all over themselves to bring new freebies to them in order to get their votes.

I didn’t say I liked the idea of taking away anybody’s rights. Having said that, I also don’t care for people abusing their right to vote to take away anybody else’s hard earned money.

As I said in my next post, we need to have a serious discussion about the definition of poverty. The church should be in the charity business NOT the government. And people should be turning to charity as a last resort not as a way of life.

 

[57classic]

Poor people have very little say in the government as it is. What you propose is a poverty restriction on having a voice in society which I’m pretty sure is unconstitutional. While there are some who may take advantage of the system many people rely on it to survive. You may have found a way out of poverty but that doesn’t mean that everyone else has the means or knowledge to do so.

If you want to help others get off government assistance why don’t you show them how you did it. Work to set up a program to lead people out of poverty. Give people the resources to achieve, don’t take away their rights and hope they’ll figure it out.

If I could find anyone who actually wanted to work that hard in this day and age I wouldn’t have to show them.
Seasonally we need help around the farm. Everybody wants a job but, they don’t show up until after feeding time. They can’t actually drive the machinery they assured us they grew up running or they demolish it or drive a truck as though it can turn like a Volkswagon. They say they have checked the feeders and they are fine, but on inspection, they are all empty. It has been going on for years now. We have had our hopes raised and dashed literally a dozen times by people who desperately needed a job but didn’t want to work.

 

[shockerfan]

You asked about voting yourself other people’s money. This statement is technically not correct. State program funds are public, meaning that they are available to everyone who meets the set criteria for enrollment.

Depends how you look at the statement. Yes, state money is “the people’s money”, but not all people contribute, thus, if they vote for a tax increase on those that do contribute, while they do not contribute, then they are in fact voting themselves someone else’s money, if they will receive that money.

You seem to think its unfair that you can vote to enact programs that will benefit yourself. If that were the case we all should only be able to vote on programs designed to benefit people who aren’t us.

Not necessarily. There are programs that help everyone, like legislation to ensure clean water, or help pay for schools, etc. The context of my question is specifically related to one person who does not pay taxes voting to increase the taxes of someone else. Seems a bit like legalized stealing, thus the point of my original question, which you didn’t answer. Same principle applies to voting for increased property taxes when one does not own property…is it moral? Its certainly legal, but is it moral?

So, because you didn’t answer my question directly, am I right in assuming you do feel its OK to vote yourself someone else’s money?

 

[Sparkythedog]

If I could find anyone who actually wanted to work that hard in this day and age I wouldn’t have to show them.
Seasonally we need help around the farm. Everybody wants a job but, they don’t show up until after feeding time. They can’t actually drive the machinery they assured us they grew up running or they demolish it or drive a truck as though it can turn like a Volkswagon. They say they have checked the feeders and they are fine, but on inspection, they are all empty. It has been going on for years now. We have had our hopes raised and dashed literally a dozen times by people who desperately needed a job but didn’t want to work.

I can’t diagnose the issues you’re having with your farmhands. Reference checks, extra training on dangerous machinery should be mandatory.

That being said, there may be other issues that people have aside from just needing a job. Some people need help learning how to take direction, complete tasks, manage their time, etc. These are deeper issues that that need to be addressed in conjunction with employment.

My second thought about you situation is that you are making a general statement about people in poverty based on the very few people that you have hired to help out on your farm. People “these days” are just as hardworking / lazy as they were “back then”. If you want change you need to find the root of the problem and attack that. Hint: It’s not voting rights.

 

[57classic]

You are correct, it is not voting rights.

It is the parents. So many people are not being taught the difference between self respect and self esteem. They have an abundance of esteem for themselves but at their core they cannot respect themselves, consequently they cannot respect anybody else. They were not taught by their parents to respect themselves and to avoid doing the things that would cause a person to lose self respect.
Parents have given up their mandate to raise their kids to the public schools. Public schools teach so many things that are contrary to a wholesome, productive life.

If this country suffered such an economic catastrophe that the government could not care for the vast number who are even currently on the dole, chaos and violence would result as those who are conditioned to take would personally and physically take from those who have scrimped, saved and prepared.

We see the beginnings of it in Europe and the hopelessness of it in the old Soviet Union. That is not what our country was founded to be. Jamestown attempted a commune until they quickly figured out that it wouldn’t work. They then went back to “if you don’t work you don’t eat.”

Please don’t tell me there are no jobs. There may be jobs that are “not good enough” for the person seeking but there are jobs out there, sometimes one has to take 2, 3 or even 4 jobs but it has been done before.

You lecture me on how to manage hired help, don’t you think that if a person says they can do something during the interview, they should be able to do that thing? Don’t you think that if a person tells their employer they HAVE done a task, that task should be DONE? Is it ok to lie to get and keep a job? There is no honor or self respect or workers would take pride in a job well done and pay actually EARNED.