Scrapping Welfare

[stinkcat_14]

It would be nice if we somehow decided to actually abide by the Constitution and leave this issue at the local levels. The federal government has no constitutional authority to provide welfare.

Of course, you have so called conservatives who claim they are entitled to federal government dollars in the form of social security and medicare. With this attitude among so called conservatives, the size of the federal government is never going to shrink.

 

[DarkLight]

I would love to see any and all welfare handled on a local level, through city taxes, or maybe on a state level. I think the federal government needs to get out of it. If that were to happen, I’d happily support it- though private charity is leagues better.

The main concern is that you tend to get wealth concentrated in different areas. You want to avoid a situation where struggling areas with a lot of poverty don’t have the resources to help everyone, while the wealth concentrates in neighboring areas.

 

[Sarcelle]

So what do you propose?

Remove women from the workplace so that the only option they have for financial support is marriage? Either get married or starve?

Is this in line with Catholic teaching?

I do not think it is sin for me to work.

 

[upant]

Of course, you have so called conservatives who claim they are entitled to federal government dollars in the form of social security and medicare. With this attitude among so called conservatives, the size of the federal government is never going to shrink.

stop taking money for this insurance program and conservatives will not be entitled.

 

[exnihilo]

My comment was more about the fact married women entered the workforce and the government took all that gain rather than it going to the family.

Women have always worked. But as to the broader issue it used to be the husband or father (family in a broader sense) was responsible for women. Now that is the state. That naturally makes the state stronger while making the family weaker.

 

[GLam1761]

As to the OP, my answer would be yes and no,
yes, the social assistance SHOULD be pared
down BUT the onus should be that the CHURCHES
be responsible to take up the slack. After all
only God’s People are called upon to Alms-giving.

 

[stinkcat_14]

stop taking money for this insurance program and conservatives will not be entitled.

It is not an insurance program, it is a welfare program. You have a property right to an insurance contract. If the contract doesn’t pay you can sue. That is not the case with social security and medicare.

 

[upant]

It is not an insurance program, it is a welfare program. You have a property right to an insurance contract. If the contract doesn’t pay you can sue. That is not the case with social security and medicare.

it was started as an insurance program.

to those who don’t pay in, it is a welfare program but it isn’t to those who pay.

it is not a good insurance program but you pay and can expect something in return. a lot of investments lose money

 

[stinkcat_14]

it was started as an insurance program.

Nope.

to those who don’t pay in, it is a welfare program but it isn’t to those who pay.

Nope. There is no paying in. You pay a tax.

 

[IWantGod]

Women have always worked. But as to the broader issue it used to be the husband or father (family in a broader sense) was responsible for women. Now that is the state. That naturally makes the state stronger while making the family weaker.

Why does a working women make the family weaker?

 

[exnihilo]

Both parents working outside of the home in modern society means many kids today are raised by complete strangers many in a group setting. That surely doesn’t strengthen the family. Of course women have always worked. It is the outside the home aspect that is a problem when children are involved.

 

[Sarcelle]

If this is the case, maybe schools, both public and private, where children spend most of their day should be abolished.

 

[exnihilo]

I think the government ones definitely should be. But after a certain age children taking instruction would make sense.

 

[Theo520]

So what do you propose?

Remove women from the workplace so that the only option they have for financial support is marriage? Either get married or starve?

Is this in line with Catholic teaching?

I do not think it is sin for me to work.

You’r clever,
I bet that move would solve our problems in education
Be able to get some quality and stern old maids running the schools again

 

[Sarcelle]

You mean ruler wielding nuns?

Do they or did they really exist?

I did not grow up Catholic nor did I go to Catholic school.

How would that solve our education problems?

 

[Theo520]

You mean ruler wielding nuns?

Do they or did they really exist?

I did not grow up Catholic nor did I go to Catholic school.

I was thinking of secular teachers since that has always been a career option for single women.

Thinking of Nuns, yes the image is accurate. The Nun in my 1st grade used to rap my knuckles regularly and told my parents she didn’t want me in her class, LOL

The change would revive the Nun orders with all the unmarried recruits.

 

[Sarcelle]

Honestly speaking, as a single woman, I’d rather have the choice of careers available to me than be siphoned off to a few socially approved ones.

I rather like working with freight trains than working with children. I was never the nurturing type.

 

[Sarcelle]

Recruits or conscripts?

 

[upant]

upant:

it was started as an insurance program.

Nope.

to those who don’t pay in, it is a welfare program but it isn’t to those who pay.

Nope. There is no paying in. You pay a tax.

as i said before the act had welfare in it but also insurance.

Many of the federal and state programs that provide income security to U.S. families have their roots in the Social Security Act (the Act) of 1935. This Act provided for unemployment insurance, old-age insurance, and means-tested welfare programs. https://www.ssa.gov/

do taxes have a death benefit?

SEC. 203. (a) If any individual dies before attaining the age of sixty-five, there shall be paid to his estate an amount equal to 3 1/, per centum of the total wages determined by the Board to have been paid to him, with respect to employment after December 31, 1936

.

 

[Theo520]

Recruits or conscripts?

I’d wager that going back a bit, more than a few parents hand delivered their daughter for service