jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (53 posts)

Solutions To Reform Welfare

  1. gmwilliams profile image87
    gmwilliamsposted 4 years ago

    No humane person is against the government giving needed assistance to the indigent elderly, the severely mentally and physically disabled, and to those who otherwise cannot work.   However, there are plenty of able bodied people who refuse to work thus further draining the economy and those who are hard working.   What solutions do YOU propose to cut welfare costs to the absolute and bare minimum?

    1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
      Uninvited Writerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      So, has it changed since Clinton changed it that you are only allowed to be on welfare for 5 years?

      1. Patty Inglish, MS profile image94
        Patty Inglish, MSposted 4 years agoin reply to this

        In Ohio, Cash Benefits can last for only 3 years for families with children and food stamp cards do not dispense cash. So, some people buy food with the card and sell it on the street corner or out of their homes for 1/2 price, cash - perhaps investigators could help stop that.

        Medicaid coverage can last for additional years, but many families are sanctioned for noncompliance with required job search, education, and other aspects of the program and are quickly losing Medicaid as well as Cash and Food Stamps.

        Childcare help is available only for the first 3 or 5 kids for a set number of years - we have Somalian refugee familes of an adult female and over 5 kids who are stuck.

        1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
          Uninvited Writerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          Thank you for answering my question smile

      2. A Driveby Quipper profile image62
        A Driveby Quipperposted 4 years agoin reply to this

        Welfare is run by the individual states, not the federal government.

        1. profile image0
          Motown2Chitownposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          That isn't quite true.  Welfare programs are state run, but state AND federally funded.  There is more control than people think in the hands of the federal government.

    2. wilderness profile image98
      wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Provide subsistence level welfare only for the able bodied (barracks, maybe rather than apartments) while at the same greatly increasing services to promote employment.  Job training, transportation, work clothing, day care, etc.

      As income rises, don't shut off welfare; instead slowly decrease it.  Maybe earn a dollar, lose half that in welfare.  Telling someone Uncle Sam will provide total support if they quit work instead of giving $100 to help out is counter productive.

      For able workers, limit the time on welfare.  If after 5 years you can't support your kids, Uncle Sam will provide homes for them while you starve.  Stick to it.

      Triple or quadruple investigation and enforcement stopping fraud (supporting the "disabled", for instance while they play golf on the weekends) .  It pays big dividends.  Same as welfare in general in that the disabled can work, but lose 50 cents of benefits for each dollar earned.

      Stop much of the school lunches; when half of the students require someone else to provide their lunch, my belief in the concept fails.  The idea of weekend or summertime school lunches is stupid as well; if parents won't feed their kids find someone that will.  Supposedly they are already getting enough help to feed their family.

      And the toughest - give local administrators the responsibility and authority to modify the welfare according to actual needs.  A set, pre-determined amount the same for everyone and set by central government doesn't work.

      1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
        Uninvited Writerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

        Lets bring back workhouses... roll

        1. wilderness profile image98
          wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          Actually, not a bad idea.  At least in some form or another.

          Is there a reason that the able bodied can't sweep streets or the courthouse floor to "earn" their way?  Mow grass or do simple landscaping?  Paint section 8 housing or clean the yard/common areas? 

          While I recognize that many welfare recipients (that make a lifestyle out of it) find work repugnant and beneath them, they need to be taught better.  Requiring people to work for their food isn't demeaning; it's how the world works.  Entitlements are an invention of man, not nature, and so are the demands that the taxes from my meager earnings go to support freeloaders that are more than capable of supplying at least a portion of their own needs.

    3. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Cancel Obama's plan to have paid security for the rest of his life.   Let him buy his own shotgun to protect himself.   That'll keep the U.S. from spending a lot of money.

      Monitor food stamp cards better, so people can't get cash from them.

      Cancel Obamacare and start over,  using the funds available to fund Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid like it's supposed to be done, including paying people to handle fraud control.

      Fire all the Leftist Communists in the Administration including Obama and Jay Carney and give their salaries to people who actually want to work for a living.

      Eliminate the Inheritance Tax on personal Real Estate so that people who've actually paid for their homes can actually own those homes and will them to their children etc.

      All those economic things are tied together.   Making it easier for people to actually achieve something gives them hope,  gives them incentive to work if they're able to work.    Mr. Obama's hopey changey thingey stinks because it's lumping everyone's situation in together instead of continuing the basic setup of our economy that allows for individual progress and success.

      I really think that if the "rich" people in this Country would balk vocally at the idea of them being taxed more than everyone else,  Obama would've had to recant his idea, leaving the wealthy to contribute to charities or persons like they always had been doing.    But I guess even the wealthy are afraid to butt heads with a man who speaks with such a bold slithery tongue.

      1. Cody Hodge5 profile image61
        Cody Hodge5posted 4 years agoin reply to this

        Don't forget that Bush is getting that same security as well.

        1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
          Uninvited Writerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          And Clinton, and Bush Sr and Carter...

          1. Patty Inglish, MS profile image94
            Patty Inglish, MSposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            That's true - we have a lot of $$ tied up in retired politicians.

            1. tammybarnette profile image61
              tammybarnetteposted 4 years agoin reply to this

              Exactly, 18% of our spending is on pensions! 18% on the military, 19% on healthcare, and 10% on welfare....So yes. Pensions are a big drain on our tax dollars.

              1. profile image0
                Brenda Durhamposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                But necessary.
                Most of them.

                1. tammybarnette profile image61
                  tammybarnetteposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Necessary? Why? Lifetime benefits and pay, really...

                  1. profile image0
                    Brenda Durhamposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                    It is the American way to respect those citizens who've served our Nation properly,  and to care for our elderly/helpless no matter if they're a public figure or not.
                    I'm against permanent security for Obama because he has not and does not and will likely never serve our Nation properly.  Now, when it comes to Social Security and Medicare or Medicaid, etc.,  when he gets to an eligible age/situation, then he should get those benefits too.    If he's still in America by then.   I for one am hoping he will retire to some foreign Nation long before that.   I think he'd make a fairly good civil rights activist in Africa or some Muslim Country or anywhere that there really IS a need for civil rights activism,  where there really is abuse, etc.    But he's taking the easy way by trying to correct things here in America that have already been corrected long ago.  He is a man way behind the times,  stuck in an age where his fervor only leads to arrogance and division.  And his own notoriety and wealth of course.
                    But indeed I do not underestimate his power.  His position as President carries a lot of weight.  Unfortunately in his case,  for us Americans.

        2. profile image0
          Brenda Durhamposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          Indeed I haven't forgotten.
          But Obama is different,  or so he seems to indicate with his behavior and his words.  He is so much better, so much wiser, so much better at getting people to do things, such a great "peacemaker", so much better at insulting people and shaming them into "bucking up" as he phrased it.
          I just thought that the great Obama could use the Chicago mafia to protect him as usual!   Or the Black Panthers.  Or perhaps the Muslim Brotherhood.   Or else that his great communication skills would allow him to talk any criminal out of hurting him.   He has, after all, been able to talk half of American voters into believing what comes out of his mouth.

          1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
            Uninvited Writerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            There you go, projecting again with no proof

    4. HowardBThiname profile image80
      HowardBThinameposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      The best way to reform welfare is to shift it over to a "work" program. Recipients would have to perform labor to get their checks. That does two things - first, it gives them a sense of honor, because they did something for the money. Second, communities would benefit from the work.

      1. Cody Hodge5 profile image61
        Cody Hodge5posted 4 years agoin reply to this

        While I agree with the concept, doesn't that technically just provide more government jobs?

        1. wilderness profile image98
          wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          Yes.  So pay them 1/2 minimum wage, coupled with welfare to bring the total to a minimum subsistence level.  Reduce welfare 50 cents for every dollar earned when the person leaves govt. jobs for outside work.

          Work no harder on private jobs than govt. - bring home more money.  Most will try to get off the "welfare" jobs instead of spending their lives on welfare as they do now.

  2. gmwilliams profile image87
    gmwilliamsposted 4 years ago

    +1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

  3. Rafini profile image87
    Rafiniposted 4 years ago

    Spend less on welfare programs (cash payments) while increasing education benefits, and by education I mean any and all forms - including apprenticeships and internships.

    First of all, it must be recognized that a traditional K-12 education is not a one-size-fits-all solution.

    Second, not everyone who graduates high school is cut out to go to college. 

    Third, education is a lifelong activity - whether the student is aware of it or not. 

    Fourth, retrain all levels of society to appreciate diverse educational opportunities.

    Fifth, outline and enforce expectations for all participants.

    Sixth, regulate system to prevent unauthorized use. (double dipping, fake id's, etc.)


    Education is key to improving life chances - why keep those in need, in need?

  4. profile image0
    Sooner28posted 4 years ago

    Ultimately, any person should not have kids they cannot afford to take care of and educate on their own.  I completely agree with much of the conservative critique that people should take personal responsibility for their actions.  I also happen to be pro-choice, and think birth control should be widely available, so there is no way to object that I am not providing any means to achieve this.

    Where I differ with some conservatives (not all), is that once a human being (kid, adult, whatever), is alive, they should not starve to death because someone doesn't like paying taxes, or because of misguided notions about "worth to society" being equivalent to the worth of a human being.  Everyone should have the capacity for shelter, food, and medical care.  Which is why, I think, as a liberal, it annoys me MORE when people have kids they can't take care of and afford, because I think they have a right to all of the basic necessities of life and know these expenses have no choice but to be covered, which is an expense that could be avoided if people who cannot afford kids or who are not intelligent enough to educate them simply do not reproduce.

    Many conservatives don't believe people have the right not to starve, unfortunately.  So, for them, their anger is only based on the fact that they have to pay taxes, and they would change THAT situation if they could.  I would not make any kind of welfare requirements more stringent.  I can only advise people, in the words of president Obama, to stop "acting stupidly."

  5. BobbiRant profile image60
    BobbiRantposted 4 years ago

    I think ALL government leaders and their cronies be drug tested.......just like poor people.  Drugs in government staff's test findings?  Fire them so they can be unemployed too.  There ARE working poor ya know.....those who work but get paid nothing to live on..........Most of the people in most countries fall into this category.  Why do we now live in a country where the poor hate the poor?

  6. tammybarnette profile image61
    tammybarnetteposted 4 years ago

    I think drug testing should be a prerequisite, followed by random testing for any and all welfare benefits. There are many people today abusing these systems and ruining the programs for those who truly need a step up not a hand out. I think volunteer work would be a great way to foster work ethic if one can not find employment. Something needs to be done about the abuse and fraud, I think maybe undercover officers living amoung the homeless would learn a lot and be able to save millions in tax dollars to be used for those who really want to do better. As a country we really have to do better to educate our people. Education is the key to solving poverty.

    1. wilderness profile image98
      wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Education is indeed key, but it need not be college.  A decent high school education, followed perhaps by a trade school is plenty.

      What doesn't work is our current welfare system.  As you point out there is tremendous fraud and cheating, plus the way it is set up it destroys incentive to work and creates huge incentive to either cheat and/or learn to work the system.

      1. tammybarnette profile image61
        tammybarnetteposted 4 years agoin reply to this

        I agree that everyone is not cut out for college, the catch is however, that you can't hardly get a job these days without a degree...so employers will have to be willing to accept trade certificates, etc.with as much accredidation as a college degree.

        You are100% correct that our system is broken. However, the trully sad part is that is not because welfare pays so well it drives away work ethis from those who a truly wanting to step up, but that these cheaters are perfectly happy to live in the streets and sell their food cards for money to buy drugs and alcohol.

        1. wilderness profile image98
          wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          I have to disagree on the college thing, Tammy.  My daughter in law and I have had this argument; she and my son works in one world while I work in another.  I live in the blue collar world, they in the white collar world.  Although it has decreased in size, blue collar work (no college required) is far from gone.

          Who built your house?  Your car?  Who put your tires on or repaired your car?  Who delivered the groceries to the supermarket?  Who built your TV, refrigerator and toilet bowl?  Who brings the power to your home, or water?  Who "cleans" the sewage you produce?  These jobs will never disappear, and in fact will likely increase in value as applicants for them dwindle.  There seems to be a scarcity of workers between fast food and shuffling papers; it is not unusual for a simple electrician to earn 6 figures today with a little overtime as a result.

          All of these require some form of post high school education, but nowhere college.  They are open to anyone willing to work and that already has a decent high school education. 

          "Drives away work ethic" - I firmly believe that if we could end just half the fraud in the system and get the "lifers" out of it we could easily feed and house everyone that actually needs a temporary hand up as well as the disabled, elderly, etc.  Instead we give them more each day - I see Congress approved additional unemployment benefits which is just another welfare program for people that find honest work demeaning.

          1. tammybarnette profile image61
            tammybarnetteposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Wilderness, My hubby climbed his way up the ladder at his job of 20+ years, he was blue collar factory guy, but now a quality engineer, however, all employess hired at his plant are required to have a four degree. Maybe there are more openings than I realized, I hope so.

            I agree about the "lifers," these folks obviously do not want to do anything but sit back and draw a check. I actually agreed with the unemployement decision, only because work has been scarce and many jobs are laying off and down sizing. But as you point out, many abuse this system as well. It seems to me many administrative type jobs that are in place to find and correct fraud and abuse have bloated budgets and are not doing the jobs they are paid to do.

            1. wilderness profile image98
              wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

              Oh, come on, Tammy.  The janitor has a degree?  The fork truck driver?  Punch press operator?  What would the degree be in?  Those kinds of jobs have no college training that would be pertinent at all!  Unless you mean a trade degree - I have that, too, and it's from a university although not from the general studies classes.  Companies differ, of course, but I've never of such a thing.

              The first 22 years of my life I was in a small factory.  There were 3 degreed people - plant manager (actually I don't know that), office manager and myself in quality.  Half the labor crew didn't finish high school and 2 of the 7 could not read or write - signed with an X.  Nevertheless they had good jobs that paid well for the area.

              There really are lots of jobs in all kinds of fields out there.  Construction is increasingly being taken over by illegals, but there is still lots of work even there for skilled labor.

              1. tammybarnette profile image61
                tammybarnetteposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                His company was the same when he started as what you describe, and no, not the janitors, but they are hispanics who speak no english...those who have been there were not made to run get a degree, but there company has been sold so many times over the past few years, and now even line operators are required to have a college degree...ridiculous, but true...the company who now owns them is a Swedish company

                Your right about construction, which is a shame, but as you stated earlier, some people have some sort of entitlement issue and think in their narcissistic minds that they are some how above such work....and let's face it, most hispanics are hard workers who will gladly fill those positions all day long.

                1. wilderness profile image98
                  wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Wow, that's crazy.  I'm surprised they can get help,  Have to wonder if they still will after the recession ends (if it ever does sad )

                  Yes they do and yes they are.  Have an entitlement issue and work hard, that is.  I've seen illegals (never a hispanic American citizen) be forced to carry a 100# piece of sheetrock while they run around the job site.

                  1. tammybarnette profile image61
                    tammybarnetteposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                    That is so sad sad Modern day slavery, really....I hope the immigration issue is fast tracked, it shouldn't take years to become a citizen. sad truth is they are happy to do anything to flee the drug cartel rulers of their own country.

                2. Patty Inglish, MS profile image94
                  Patty Inglish, MSposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Just for information -- janitors in our public schools here must show certified knowledge of chemicals, reactions when mixed together, and related knowledge and skills, because of the chemical cleaners used. Usually short-term certificate training at our community college is enough, but some suburbs require training in building management - and some schools will waive all that for 2 years' proven experience in the field. Some janitors stay in school part-time and earn an Asssociate's Degree, but degree or no degree, they make a LOT of overtime pay and often end up the year with $60 - $80 annual income.

                  1. tammybarnette profile image61
                    tammybarnetteposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                    Wow, I had no idea...so they make a lot more than the teachers who are preparing the future geneation of Americans...That is truly a shame.

                  2. wilderness profile image98
                    wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                    The chemical training is probably the result of Haz-Mat training - every employee must understand the hazards of any chemical they might be exposed to.

                    Building management might make sense, too, at least for the supervisor as school janitors usually do some building maintenance/repair as well as sweep floors. 

                    And yes, 60-80 K doesn't sound too unusual, at least for big cities.  And how many college grads today will earn that within 2 years?  In the long run they may earn more, but not a great deal after paying off huge student loans.

  7. BobbiRant profile image60
    BobbiRantposted 4 years ago

    How about creating Real jobs with Real wages that Real people can actually live on?  There's a good start.  BTW: 85% of Medicaid payments support those big corporate nursing homes, only 15% goes to families in need.  Research anyone?

    1. wilderness profile image98
      wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Real jobs with a living wage is key all right, but how do we do that?  Until Americans can learn to buy American and quit importing everything they want I don't see a solution.

      I don't understand the medicaid thing - are you saying that big nursing homes have an 85% profit margin or just that they house 85% of nursing home residents?

 
working