Welfare

[Rydia]

What's your opinion? Since this is such a gray area I added questions. Unfortunantly it is a big list of "shoulds" which may get on some peoples nerves XD

Do you think the current system works? Are people getting too much/too little money? Is it a fair system?

Should everyone be entitled to it? If not, then who should?

Should people be allowed to be on it for life with out ever attempting to make their life better?

Should there be a time limit for how long you can be on? (6 months, 9 months)

Should the people on welfare be able to spend their money as they want? Or should the government give them stamps for what they can buy. (stamps for clothes, medicine, and the already existing food stamps)

Should cell phones with free service be a free handout? computers and internet? (if you make under a certain amount of money, you can get free cell phones with service. not sure about the internet)

What about children? Should people on welfare have reverse sterilization or a form of birth control that would make them sterile x number of years?

Should volunteer work be mandatory for those that go on welfare? What about drug testing?

Should illegal aliens be eligible for welfare?

If you have more questions or comments add them Gonna work on formulating my answers.

 

[Gaige]

I don't know about other countries, but here, they're beginning to get very strict with people who continually turn down the jobs they provide, which makes laziness a less viable option for those who just don't wanna work.

Should everyone be entitled to it? As a go between while the banks and the recipient are looking for employment, yes, but not for long.

Unless somebody can't actually work for some reason, they should be booted out into the world and not be allowed to continually leech off our taxes. If people have children to look after, understandable. But if they're just fucking about all day on the Internet or whatever, it should be stopped. There should really be standardised tests for this sort of thing, but that's the authoritarian in me speaking.

If you don't have children and you're able to work, I think the cut off point should be three months. However, people with children should have a cut off point too because there's always gonna be school, and most people have grandparents, parents spouses, friends, siblings, and other close acquaintances to take care of their kids some of the time. Though people with kids should have a 6 month cut off point, since they'd likely be less able to bend their schedule with a kid in tow.

I think that the majority of money should be on stamps, with perhaps 10% of the welfare set aside for leisure and recreation. 10% when it comes to welfare isn't a whole lot, so it's not like they could blow it on something ridiculously extravagant.

Free handouts are a nono unless you're disabled, really. The 10% leisure cut is more than enough as far as I'm concerned. But again, maybe I'm too strict.

Sterilization MIGHT be too barbaric, but I could be swayed towards it if it were temporary. I'd prefer revoked welfare, but then the poor kid would suffer. At that point, I'd hand the kid to Social Services. If they're living off the government and having a baby, they won't be responsible enough, and the kid'll suffer from their lack of thought, as they so often do in situations like these.

Aliens/illegal immigrants are very subjective. Some can't survive back home. The situations are always changing. It's not really something you can generalise into who gets money and who doesn't as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Abstract Debauchery]

I like the idea that anyone on Welfare has to do some kind of volunteer work. I don't like the concept of a free ride very much. Also, mandatory drug testing, and a lengthy background check would help weed out those that are only trying to beat the system.

 

[StrungOut]

I think that people who can work should not be eligible to welfare, unless they lost their job and are in the process to find one. I think a 6 month or worst case scenario one year limit would be acceptable. People that have disabilities (mental and/or physical) would be eligible for life.

I like Rydia's idea of stamps instead of a check. That way people on welfare that want to buy something that is not essential could move their ass and work a bit. (I'm still talking about the ones I consider non-eligible). Drug testing for those who are on welfare is also a good idea.

Cell phones with free service should never be a free handout. I think cell phones are a luxury and are not (yet) essentials.

I'm not fond of the sterilization idea but if you plan to stay on welfare BY CHOICE for the rest of you life and want kids, then you have a serious lack of judgment. I mean who want to be on welfare and raise 1, 2 or even 3 kids in that situation. If you already have children an for some circumstances you have to be on welfare for a period, then you deserve a bigger check than the average.

 

[Rydia]

Ok here are my answers.

Do you think the current system works? Are people getting too much/too little money? Is it a fair system?

I think the current system is a bit flawed. I don't think people should be allowed to be on it for life and never even attempt to find a job. Also, someone my fiance worked with had a lot of trouble getting off welfare. Every minimum wage job earned her less money than she would have gotten if she had just stayed on welfare, and with the amount of money she earned she did not qualify for welfare. This was back when minimum wage was $5.50. I do not know if this is still the case. If so, then maybe minimum wage needs to be raised again? Someone that works hard should not be earning less than someone that depends on the government for their full income!

Also I am sick of the mindset that some people have. The "it's ok, I never have to get a job, the government will take care of me." Anyone with that mindset should be treated like a child cause they are certaintly acting like one! Be told what they can eat, how late they can stay out, take away voting privelages ect... My sister was actually told by a second grader at the school she teaches at "Learning all this is stupid, we will never have to work, the president sends us checks." Ok it wasn't that articulate but you get the idea.

Should everyone be entitled to it? If not, then who should?

This is a hard one. I think everyone who meets the requirements should be entitled to it. However I think there should be limits.

Should people be allowed to be on it for life with out ever attempting to make their life better? Should there be a time limit for how long you can be on? (6 months, 9 months)

No, people need to at least try tofind a job. There are jobs out there that people are capable of doing without high school diplomas. And there should be time limits. 6 months for families without children and 9 months for people with kids. People with severe disabilities, or mental illness I'd make the exception for. However, there should be a tough screening process so no one fakes it.

Should the people on welfare be able to spend their money as they want? Or should the government give them stamps for what they can buy. (stamps for clothes, medicine, and the already existing food stamps)

I think there needs to be stricter regulations on what these people can spend their money on. I mean, $400 haircuts? That's highly unnecessary, and if they have the money for an expensive hair cut every month, then are they just getting too much money? It's also disheartening to see them spend the money on drugs. I like the percentage system Nikki brought up. So much for food, clothing, medicine, leisure.

Should cell phones with free service be a free handout? computers and internet? (if you make under a certain amount of money, you can get free cell phones with service. not sure about the internet)

Changed my answer! No, lan lines not cell phones. It's upsetting when someone gets handed the latest phone for free because they make under a certain amount of money. I mean smart phones should not be a handout. Brick and flip phones with the bare essentials, (CALLING ONLY NO TEXT MESSAGING!) are much more like it. I work and people get much better phones than I have for free! Computers I'd say no to.

What about children? Should people on welfare have reverse sterilization or a form of birth control that would make them sterile x number of years?

Surgical sterilization is going to far. I'd be more for Norplant or depo. Nor plant works for a few years and you get a depo shot every three months. With it should come free medical check for any possible problems or side effects of these methods. Heck, the people in the situation might be thankful for getting these for free. Though the only problem I could see is irresponsibility. People may be less concerned about using protection and expose themselves to STDs.

Should volunteer work be mandatory for those that go on welfare? What about drug testing?

I like the idea of this. There are so many parks that could be cleaned, nursing home and animal shelters to volunteer at, so much people could do. And it would be like tax payers were paying them to do it. If they did do volunteer work, then I wouldn't mind people being on welfare for life or using their money for whatever they want. Maybe there could even be a tier system. The more hours you volunteer the more money you get each month.

Should illegal aliens be eligible for welfare?

No, sorry just no. It's not fair to people who come into the country legally and have to wait several years to get their greed card or visa.

 

[Sum1sgruj]

I think a lot of people get the wrong idea of welfare.
People that are on welfare have to work. It's not like they just sit around and do nothing. Government housing requires 500 a month, and welfare checks/food stamps/etc. carry many guidelines. Generally speaking, getting 'booted' out and be made to look for a job is one thing. To be booted out to find a job that will actually get you somewhere is another.
There are not enough jobs for every single citizen, much less decent ones. That's practically 100s of 1000s of people who have to seek welfare,, without even adding the extra variables such as recessions and general adversity.
And it's crude to say that they live off our taxes, seeing how taxpayers are the ones that stole all the damn jobs!!

Cell phones are inexpensive and help people who need to stay in touch with their workplace and other things. It's not exactly 'just a luxery' in todays world. Besides, cell phone signals are dirt cheap. The phone companies are ripping you off in that respect, not the lower class.

Anyways, even the government knows you may not find a decent job in a fixed amount of time. If they did, they would give you one... And if you don't have kids or an illness, etc. they're gonna give you the minimum amount of support.
There is a maximum income limit to be eligible, so it does not apply to everyone. In fact, a lot of respectful people still find very little support with welfare due to some technicality.
With that in mind, I don't think it's anybody's business, as your taxes would just be wasted on something else anyways and the vast majority who complain about it don't know what it is to be broke and option-less. Yes, there is a big luck factor,, Somehow, people get caught on an idea that bc they were lucky enough to succeed, everyone else should. But that's a false way of looking at it, because simple logic will tell you that if you had no support or lucky opportunity, you would be far worse than you are doing now.

I know what a big waste of tax money is: Anti-Drinking Commercials!!

 

[Bambi]

. However, people with children should have a cut off point too because there's always gonna be school, and most people have grandparents, parents spouses, friends, siblings, and other close acquaintances to take care of their kids some of the time. Though people with kids should have a 6 month cut off point, since they'd likely be less able to bend their schedule with a kid in tow.

JUst touching on this point for a moment

I'm aware you say 'most' people there, but these grandparents, family members, parents and siblings that I have all work, so then, would they have to then stop working and claim, to look after my kid?

I agree parents need to get off their arses and search for a job, but 6 months is way harsh, do you have any idea how long I was looking for a job? Folk see 'single' 'dependents' on an application against someone with no commitments, who do you think the employer will think more reliable? It's hard as shit trying to get a job with a kid, and you all know how long Ive been trying for. It just just a stroke of luck that I eventually landed the one I have

However, I do feel - well, no, know, there are some women out there that will keep popping out the kids at reguklar intervals (7 years is when you are expected to get back in to the job market) just so they can keep onj claiming. If you can't afford to look after teh kids on your own, you shouldnt be allowed to keep knocking them out. I've learnt my lesson after one. And if you want a big familiy then you better well find a way to support your brood then.

There are not enough jobs for every single citizen, much less decent ones.

beggars cant be choosers and if folk are desperate enough to work, they will do anything, you cant be a snob about what job you want when youve been sat on the dole for fuck knows how long, you get a job and search for a new one whilst employed, you cant just expect to repeatedly turn down jobs because its not suitable for you. ESPECIALLY in the current climate. If a job comes up and you get it, you should be all over it like a tramp on chips

Its not like you go to the job centre and they loook at every job, they do ask you what area you want to work in, and they will search in that field anyway. I was searching the admin sector for ages, ended up widening my search to include retail, which I despise but had i got offered a job in retail, i would have taken it.

It's the people who just dont want to work im referring to really tbh, my ex has been out of work for well over a year now, no excuse, hes just a bone idle cunt. Do we really want to support people like that? At least I was trying, he just wants to get through life doing as little as possible. It's people like him that need their benefits stopped to shock them into getting bloody work

The system doesnt necessarily need changing so much it needs to toughen up abit

 

[StrungOut]

I think a lot of people get the wrong idea of welfare.
People that are on welfare have to work. It's not like they just sit around and do nothing.

You're right. A lot of them work but in many cases they work under the table. By not declaring their income, they commit a fraud and they don't pay taxes. If you work 40 hours per week at minimum wage in Quebec, you're not eligible to welfare even if you end up with a small pay.

There are not enough jobs for every single citizen, much less decent ones. That's practically 100s of 1000s of people who have to seek welfare,, without even adding the extra variables such as recessions and general adversity.

It's true that recession can affect a lot more people and at that time there is less decent jobs available, but when the economy is good, unemployment can be around 5%. I think that if you really want to find a job, it's possible to do so. You might end up with something at the minimum wage, but it's how our world works. Some people rather stay on welfare that working at a low salary.

Cell phones are inexpensive and help people who need to stay in touch with their workplace and other things. It's not exactly 'just a luxery' in todays world. Besides, cell phone signals are dirt cheap. The phone companies are ripping you off in that respect, not the lower class.

By rethinking about that, it's true that cell phone are cheap now. I was more thinking of someone who already have residential line. In that case, they don't really need cell phones and the government should not take care of that. We don't have such a program in Quebec and never heard of something like that. That's why I'm a bit against it.

The example of people on welfare around me are people that do nothing of their lives and takes advantage of the system. That's why I have a more drastic vision of welfare.

 

[Sum1sgruj]

It's the people who just dont want to work im referring to really tbh, my ex has been out of work for well over a year now, no excuse, hes just a bone idle cunt. Do we really want to support people like that? At least I was trying, he just wants to get through life doing as little as possible. It's people like him that need their benefits stopped to shock them into getting bloody work
The system doesnt necessarily need changing so much it needs to toughen up abit

There's nothing they can do about toughing up though. The gov't can't dig that deep into a person and say that they can find a job without having to include a general guideline for everyone. It's just a by-product that simply can't be controlled. I think that messing with the current system of welfare is not only pointless, but potentially dangerous to the general public. People don't starve to death in America, but that doesn't mean they should be treated less than men either. I surely wouldn't want to be humiliated every time I go to Social Services and get drilled on my financial situation just to apply. It's best to just keep it the way it is, you know?

 

[Bambi]

If folk refuse to work though, after being given ample opportunity/training/courses etc, they deserve any humiliation that may come their way

 

[ANGRYWOLF]

I am very liberal/progressive so I am for it.
As for jobs, the US is screwed as repub/conservative thinking which involves trickle down/let's make the rich richer and hope they create jobs hasn't worked and more companies have shipped jobs overseas so as to pay less and not have to pay taxes/health insurance/pensions and other costs.
So capitalism has failed the poor and now is failing the middle class.

With the recent elections involving the House and those silly tea party people I don't see any improvement in the near term.
The jobs just aren't out there and won't be there.
shrugs.

 

[Valvalis]

I think the current system is flawed in terms of the fact that welfare is as necessary as it is; there should be a job available for everyone who is able to work, and the government and companies in charge of that just aren't willing to spend the extra money and distribute it to more workers. I don't think anyone should get a free ride, but if you're disabled or really need the help and are trying to help yourself as much as possible, then there should be some way for you to get help. I mean if you're able to work, but you get screwed over by the system, then it's hard to say that you shouldn't be able to take something back from that same system.

 

[Sum1sgruj]

If folk refuse to work though, after being given ample opportunity/training/courses etc, they deserve any humiliation that may come their way

Call me crazy but I think it's safe to say that 95% of people on welfare would take an opportunity on sight.
The focus should be greedy rich people, not poor people anyways. They're the ones that caused a lower class to begin with. I think riding a pale horse through the poor for any reason is a little ridiculous.

 

[Bambi]

Yeah, and Im still only on about the folk that would rather do any thing than work, they DO exist, and they do knock out kids so they dont have to work, they claim to be living as a single adult when they have someone living with them, so they still get the benefits. There ARE the people who would rather just get their dole money once a week/fortnight whatever it is and live like that will all their rent/council tax paid. Some people actually WANT to live like that and have the free ride. And it's those people Im referring to. It's all one on one this lark, I'm sure it's easy to pick out the triers from the folk that really cant be arsed

 

[Rydia]

Call me crazy but I think it's safe to say that 95% of people on welfare would take an opportunity on sight.
The focus should be greedy rich people, not poor people anyways. They're the ones that caused a lower class to begin with. I think riding a pale horse through the poor for any reason is a little ridiculous.

Then you would be very surprised at how many people do not want to work. There is quite an attitude of, I don't have to work! The government will pay for me! People that work are stupid! My sister in law one time had people taunting her on how they were going to get her money eventually. Police were called and people were removed, but seriously.

That's why I say make volunteer work mandatory. There are so many things people could do and things that they would enjoy. Something as simple as visiting and talking to the elderly or cleaning up a park.

 

[Kandy-Sugar]

Do you think the current system works? Are people getting too much/too little money? Is it a fair system?

I think people are getting too much money for doing shit all.

I always seem them all tattooed up, taking their families to the movies all the time, buying take out, bragging about all the drugs they've got waiting for them back at home.

It's disgusting. A percentage of my wage pays for these fat losers to do nothing while I work my ass off.

Should everyone be entitled to it? If not, then who should?

Definitely not.

The only people I think should be entitled to it are people who get fired and can't find another job straight away.

That really is the only thing I can think of that I would deem acceptable.

Should people be allowed to be on it for life with out ever attempting to make their life better?

Hell no!

People shouldn't even be allowed to be on it for a year!

If they make no attempt at finding work then they should be cut off so that they are forced to find work.

Should there be a time limit for how long you can be on? (6 months, 9 months)

9 months would be plenty of time in my opinion.

People who only go out once every few weeks and say, 'Oh I tried looking for work and I can't find any' and then come back home and laze around are pathetic.

You should be out EVERY DAY during the work week, eight hours a day looking for work as if you were actually working!

Should the people on welfare be able to spend their money as they want? Or should the government give them stamps for what they can buy. (stamps for clothes, medicine, and the already existing food stamps)

Definitely not.

I've seen too many people abuse it.

They somehow manage to get really expensive tattoos, have their nails done all the time etc.

They spend it all on the wrong things. Luxuries should not be a part of their lifestyle. Necessities is all they should be entitled too when not working.

There should be stamps for everything for those particular people.

Should cell phones with free service be a free handout? computers and internet? (if you make under a certain amount of money, you can get free cell phones with service. not sure about the internet)

Um no?

Why the hell should these losers be rewarded?

If you can't afford it then you can't have it. Simple as that.

What about children? Should people on welfare have reverse sterilization or a form of birth control that would make them sterile x number of years?

Definitely. If you can't take care of yourself you sure as hell can't take care of a kid.

The only reason they pop them out is because they've spent all their money on drugs etc and can't afford the pill or condoms or they want kids in order to get more money.

Should volunteer work be mandatory for those that go on welfare? What about drug testing?

Definitely.

It isn't fair that they get to lounge around all day living off those people around them who are actually working.

I think they should be given the crappiest jobs to be honest. Make them get off their ass and motivate them to go and look for a job that they do like.

Should illegal aliens be eligible for welfare?

Um no?

They can get back on that boat and row back to wherever they came from.

Why should they suck us dry when we can't even handle our own people getting off their ass to get out of the system?

 

[Sum1sgruj]

It's disgusting. A percentage of my wage pays for these fat losers to do nothing while I work my ass off.

Lets just forget that they are required to work..
Even if there is a factor that gets them out of having to work, they are only temporary. I dunno where this idea of them not working stems from. It seems like some people are just bitter about the idea that life isn't fair in general, so they take it out on the less endowed.

Besides, all the extra necessities they get do not come from Social Services or from work, and I don't think it takes a genius to figure out where exactly that extra revenue comes from..

And lets not forget what I mentioned earlier: The job you have was taken by someone else expense. There just so happens to be an average of 6 applicants for every 1 job in America//

When you can make a living off of minimum wage McDonalds checks, then they can take away welfare.