Scrapping Welfare

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
goout said:
“welfare” as we know it is incredibly wasteful, even while it’s intent is good and while it does a lot of good. It’s incredibly inefficient and has created a culture of dependency.
Click to expand...
And what is “welfare as we know it”?
IWantGod said:
In the United States, depending on the context, the term “welfare” can be used to refer to means-tested cash benefits, especially the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program and its successor, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Block Grant, or it can be used to refer to all means-tested programs that help individuals or families meet basic needs, including, for example, health care through Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits and food and nutrition programs (SNAP). It can also include Social Insurance programs such as Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, and Medicare.
Click to expand...
@goout do you agree that it includes Unemployment, social security, and medicare?
 
goout said:
It should be noted that work is part of the human condition. Work is part of the path to sanctification.
Work is not just done for what it accomplishes, it also edifies a person spiritually. It builds a person up and the surrounding community as well.

Work should not be seen as a burden, although we know it certainly can be one when misused.

Systems that destroy the human drive to work are oppressive just as those systems which overwork and abuse people.
Welfare as we know it is certainly one of those systems, even while it helps some who need
Click to expand...
Can you explain how these systems discourage work? I am especially interested in how this applies to the TANF program, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, and Medicare.
 
guanophore said:
Can you explain how these systems discourage work?
Click to expand...
By providing a blanket welfare system that applies to anyone pretty much regardless of circumstances, it encourages generational poverty in people who become dependent on it.

My wife worked in an inner-city high school where most of the students lived off welfare. She had multiple students each year say that they didn’t need to learn anything since they were just going to live off welfare when they got out of school. It was all they knew, and they thought it was how things should be.

The concept is a positive one, but the application is a mess. We have created entire sub-societies who do nothing but live off welfare. It has created generations of people who believe that it is the governments job to pay for them to live, which simply could not be further from the truth. It has also created entire segments of society who take and give nothing back.

Some people genuinely cannot work, I have family and friends who cannot hold a job due to medical reasons. I am all for support them (though not through the federal government). I am not for paying for just anyone who doesn’t work.
 
Last edited:
In my city, Catholic Charities does not have enough money as it currently operates. If you need help with electricity, then you sign up for the monthly lottery. Too bad you did not win the CC lottery. Senior citizens need subsidized housing. Well, Catholic Charities sold the building. If you are a retired or disabled teacher, then $1200 a month is your state pension. You can not have Social Security. There are no cost of living increases. You need to take insulin expect to pay $1500 per vial per month.
The pharmacy “benefits” will cost you $4500 every three months or you can go on line to find a coupon to partially pay for your medicine. A doctor visit will be $200 with insurance. Many have no choice other than to be homeless. How can you really expect the Catholic Charities to help everyone?
 
They did only a very limited and underfunded experiment that only used 2,000 test subjects that were already unemployed. They didn’t have an employed control group.
 
guanophore said:
40.png
goout:
It should be noted that work is part of the human condition. Work is part of the path to sanctification.
Work is not just done for what it accomplishes, it also edifies a person spiritually. It builds a person up and the surrounding community as well.

Work should not be seen as a burden, although we know it certainly can be one when misused.

Systems that destroy the human drive to work are oppressive just as those systems which overwork and abuse people.
Welfare as we know it is certainly one of those systems, even while it helps some who need
Click to expand...
Can you explain how these systems discourage work? I am especially interested in how this applies to the TANF program, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, and Medicare.
Click to expand...
The damage to the work ethic caused by “welfare” is pandemic. You see it and hear about it everywhere.
I own a small business. There are millions who are almost hopelessly trapped in a welfare torpor. They have lost all initiative and this state of life has become “hereditary” now. It is passed from parent to child.
The provision of basic living expenses has robbed them of the initiative to provide for themselves.

Ask any employment or temp agency about this. The unemplyment rate where I live is currently about 9%, and at the same time, anyone and everyone can find a job today right now.
The threshold of idle pay/work pay is so high that those on welfare have a serious choice over whether to work or collect.
And I get it. if I can sit and collect, or work and make a few bucks more, that is an almost impossible choice to work.
My brother has some serious neuroses that keep him from holdiing a job. He applies for rent assistance and receives it.
He is an honest man, and in months where he didn’t need all the funding he went to the county office to see about returning the money.
They looked at him like he’s nuts. They told him just go home and take the money. “We’d have to go into the computer and change things big-time”
 
The federal government is farthest removed from the people who actually need help. Welfare should be handled on a local level first, and only move up to a higher level of government when absolutely necessary.

In reality, it should fall to the community immediately around the person (family first, then the local government if there is no family), but in our modern society that’s really not considered an option anymore.
 
ProdglArchitect said:
By providing a blanket welfare system that applies to anyone regardless of circumstances, it encourages generational poverty in people who become dependent on it.
Click to expand...
Can you identify this “blanket welfare system”. Can you show where it applies regardless of circumstances? You statement is not consistent with the definition given by the OP.

Can you please point me to where I can qualify for support? I would rather not work. 😄
Ann_Stanton said:
If you are a retired or disabled teacher, then $1200 a month is your state pension. You can not have Social Security.
Click to expand...
You mean for teachers?
 
goout said:
if I can sit and collect, or work and make a few bucks more, that is an almost impossible choice to work.
Click to expand...
My wife has a cousin like this. She has three children with no fathers in the picture. For a long time she refused to work because, and I quote, “I make more through welfare than I would working.”
 
ProdglArchitect said:
The federal government is farthest removed from the people who actually need help. Welfare should be handled on a local level first, and only move up to a higher level of government when absolutely necessary.

In reality, it should fall to the community immediately around the person (family first, then the local government if there is no family), but in our modern society that’s really not considered an option anymore.
Click to expand...
This is an orthodox Catholic principle called “subsidiarity”.
 
Last edited:
guanophore said:
Can you identify this “blanket welfare system”. Can you show where it applies regardless of circumstances? You statement is not consistent with the definition given by the OP.

Can you please point me to where I can qualify for support? I would rather not work. 😄
Click to expand...
Apologies, that’s an internal nomenclature I use to describe the current welfare system. It is given to everyone regardless of whether or not their need for welfare is the result of their own choices.

In my opinion, given that we provide free education for everyone through High School, if a person does not graduate they should not receive money from the government. They squandered their opportunity, and we should not be made to pay for their choices.

I recognize that there are family circumstances / illness/ other reasons they may not graduate; but I cannot tell you how many of my wife’s students failed her class because they would not even attempt to do the work. They would come in, sit down, stare at their phones, ignore their assignments, get up, and leave. They are not entitled to free hand outs.
 
The retirement system does not pay into Social Security. This happens in a number of states. However, many teachers that have worked other jobs during their lifetimes, may not collect both despite paying into SS. In my state some Catholic schools cover their employees under the state system. Other dioceses just have Social Security. Due to low wages under Social Security, those teachers may take home $425 to $1000 a month.
 
Cruciferi said:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Click to expand...
This debate is actually a pretty big fish. It addresses how we will live the Gospel with the least among us. (we will all become the least, at some point, so it’s good to keep that in mind)
 
Last edited:
Interesting article, which by the Grace of God I wrote a response comment.
 
It’s a endless debate that goes nowhere and we have no control over it. I’m more concerned with WWIII breaking out. Goodbye welfare if that happens.
 
ProdglArchitect said:
In my opinion, given that we provide free education for everyone through High School, if a person does not graduate they should not receive money from the government. They squandered their opportunity, and we should not be made to pay for their choices.
Click to expand...
Where i live, you have to actively look for work and show evidence, and if you don’t you lose your benefit. I think that’s reasonable enough. I don’t think any good will come from removing safety nets from people who did badly at school, and even if we did, how do we determine the slackers from the ones that just were not very intelligent and had learning difficulties? They can still get work, and be productive, there is just more competition at the bottom for Jobs, so there will always be a certain number of people dependent on the system no-matter what…

There is already a natural punishment for people who slack. They get the Jobs nobody wants.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top