What has gone wrong with this country!

[Shanobi]

Knee Jerk Tokens

You mention welfare mommies with mulitple children. Yes, there are plenty of them on welfare. And yes, they probably come form a culture of welfare. But the baby factory excuse doesn't fly anymore. If you have a baby 10 months after you go on welfare your benefit does not increase. you must sign an agreement that if you do have a baby 10 months after you receive money than that baby's share of the benefit would have to be retrieved from a 3rd party, like Catholic Charities. Instead of getting an extra $100 for the spawn you will have to settle for $100 worth of services from a 3rd party...No cash. And it's not just single mothers with 5 kids by 5 different guys. What about the 45 year old homemaker and mother of 4 who's never worked since she had the kids 18 years ago and her husband just walked out on her? She has to start from scratch with no skills and no where to turn. That could so easily be your mom. Should she suffer? WHat about the 30 yr old shop worker who lost both of his feet and it wasn't work related so he can't draw worker's comp? He'll get his Social Security disability but that won't pay the mortgage and the daycare.....Folks, there are many faces of welfare. It's only the tokens that you are shown and conditioned to hate.

 

[Tonio]

Would you believe that I never heard of Section 8 until I read this thread? Maybe that's because I don't know anyone who receives public assistance. I know that probably makes me sound like some wealthy person who never associates with the commoners. I'm certainly not wealthy, and neither are my family and friends.

I hope threads like this can encourage a rational debate about welfare. That was almost impossible in the 1960s and 1970s, when a LOT of politicians used racially inflammatory terms like "welfare queens." We don't hear too much of that anymore, much to my relief. Of course people have passionate opinions about welfare. It's our tax money that's involved.

 

[Frank]

"If you have a baby 10 months after you go on welfare your benefit does not increase."

I don't understand the problem here. Aside from the fact that there's a signed agreement to that effect - this approach ensures the baby factory situation does not perpetuate. Isn't this what everyone wants?

I think everyone understands that welfare has been massively abused in the past. Some folks here - myself included - actually know a few who have. My brother is disabled and cannot walk or feel anything in his feet, but he understands he will have to eventually find some other form of work. As much anguish as he is going through - he's on massive pain medication - he agrees with this point of view expressed here.

I wouldn't presume too much that people are "conditioned to hate". Demonizing those who disagree with you, and attempting to characterize what motivates them isn't going to convince anyone that your opinion is a better one. You'd have more luck elaborating on your argument, than making presumpions about others.

 

[vraiblonde]

Here's my radical thought - sure to make some of you hit the roof:

I think that if a woman is receiving public assistance, she should be required to be on birth control. Not a pill that she can conveniently forget but those little tubes that the doc inserts in your arm, good for six months or something (what are those things called?). That way she can sleep around as much as she wants and we don't have to pay for her little "mistakes".

I think that when you rely on the taxpayers to fund your existance, you've turned yourself into a dependent and shown that you're not responsible enough to run your own life.

Shanobi, tons of disabled people go to work every day. In this day and age there is a paying job for everyone, even if you are handicapped.

 

[Ken King]

Vraiblonde,

Weren't they called Norplant or something like that? I agree, since they won't shut their legs they should have the egg supply turned off. They obviously can't remember to take the pills and this might help them achieve employment instead of reliance on us "good hearted" taxpayers.

 

[Shanobi]

Humitarians

At times the topic of welfare reminds me of these certain "humanitarians" who always gripe, "Why are we sending all our money overseas to feed all these hungry people?! We have tons of hungry people in this country that are being left behind."...Then when the issue of welfare comes up it's these same people who would rather see these hungry people starve than allocate a fraction of their tax dollars to help them out. What do these humanitarians really want? Does this make sense....And, by the way, I don't believe that my opinion is more correct but I do feel that I may have a more informed opinion on this matter as it is a first hand opinion rather than a Birch Society newletter opinion. Yes, there are a lot of welfare cheats, many of them are turned away after some interviewing and fact finding. But this is a rational system and it's understandable how some would rather sit home and collect welfare than work a job that only makes slightly more. That's where education and work programs come into play. tHe culture of welfare is coming to a close for many people, especially those who are able to work.

 

[Tonio]

I think that if a woman is receiving public assistance, she should be required to be on birth control. Not a pill that she can conveniently forget but those little tubes that the doc inserts in your arm, good for six months or something (what are those things called?). That way she can sleep around as much as she wants and we don't have to pay for her little "mistakes".

When Norplant first came on the market, a controversial editorial in a Philadelphia paper urged policymakers to "think about" exactly what Vrai is suggesting.

I can understand why some people would hit the roof. The Norplant idea raises some ethical questions. True, the woman can simply refuse to go on public assistance rather than get Norplant, so it's not really coercion.

I think it would be easier to fix the welfare system instead to discourage any freeloaders.

 

[Shanobi]

Agreed

I agree with Tonio that Norplant is a bit heavy handed. It sounds worse than the One Child Policy. Government has not right mandating birth rates even if it is in attempts to slow the breeding rate of the lower class. What would the Right to Lifers say about this? I think both sides would argue against that idea....It is a valid idea though, but I agree that it would be easier to change the system like Tonio said.

 

[Frank]

"And, by the way, I don't believe that my opinion is more correct but I do feel that I may have a more informed opinion on this matter as it is a first hand opinion rather than a Birch Society newletter opinion. "

Still see this as more ad hominem. Your opponents must be misinformed, have no first-hand exposure, and must be a bunch of Birch society snobs. Further, the classic failing in argument - "if you understood the situation, you'd agree with me; since you don't, your opinion must originate from malice".

I've got two siblings on public support. It DOES affect me - and my fortune - personally. Add them onto the volumes of persons on public suuport I've either lived next to or personally assisted - sometimes by graciously taking them into my home. And I think continued support of most of them did them great harm. For both of my siblings - they need a working solution - not money. Money just delays the inevitable.

As someone pointed out - fix the system. Just giving people money isn't going to reach a workable solution. What my brother needs is a job where he can earn money without having to move his body hardly at all. Getting money just reminds him that he is physically "useless", at least in his mind. The other sibling just needs a good spanking, because Uncle Sam has been assisting a fairly healthy person for WAY too long.

There's an old saying "If you rob Peter to pay Paul - you can always count on Paul's support". I think you can also bet that Peter isn't gonna be thrilled with it either.

 

[vraiblonde]

Tonio, I'm curious what "ethical questions" you think the Norplant idea raises.

 

[butterfly]

I'm a little torn on this subject. I have lived on both sides, so its hard for me to have an opinion about this. I don't think that this woman should be condenmed for what she is trying to do though. I'm a single mom of 3 kids. I have a decent job as a contractor. I scrape and stuggle every month to get my bills payed and put food on the table. The place I rent is not real nice but it's all I can afford. I tryed to get section 8 after I moved down here and I'm still waiting. Does that make me a bad person? No, I don't think so. I'm not fortunate enough to have a BA degree. I'm working on it but in the mean time, I would like to give my kids a decent home. When you are doing everything that you can possibly do to make it, what is wrong with asking for a little help.

 

[Tonio]

Tonio, I'm curious what "ethical questions" you think the Norplant idea raises.

No problem. I'm talking about whether anyone has the right to interfere in someone else's reproductive decisions. (I'm not talking about abortion, by the way.) Is it right or wrong to financially induce people to have children or not have children?

I don't know as much about the law as Ken King, but my gut feeling is that any attempt to tie Norplant use to welfare would be struck down by the courts.

 

[Ken King]

Tonio,

It isn't about what I already know, it's about being able to locate the information and learn.

Several states have had policies requiring people to be sterilized as a condition of receiving public medical assistance. Maryland could do the same if they already don't and it doesn't seem limited to just medical assistance. The compelling interest is that the State only has finite resources to work the problem and without allowing some discretion in deciding how to handle the issue a state could end up bankrupt. As I see it, based on the several Supreme Court Cases on this topic, it could be held legal as the state holds down the burden on the taxpayers.

The trick is to narrowly construct the law so that it isn't wide open in application. Also of interest is the courts have held that those on assistance don't have to have their payments increased for each new offspring. Larger collecting families can be held below the normal per capita rate as the number of children increases, again to relieve the burden on the taxpayers.

 

[missi1013]

Here is the bottom line:

If you are a women on welfare-STOP having kids! I'm with vari, maybe we need a birth control system for women.

If you are a women who needs some help, that's fine, but don't abuse it and if you don't have a job, get off your lazy butt and work!

If you are disabled- I understand that it is hard to find a job, but don't sit at home and feel sorry for your self. Stand up and go on with your life and if you need the help, get it!

Bottom line is everyone in there life time will need some help and that's how the system got started. Unfortionitly it has been well abuse in the past years. My husbend is a farmer and we had a really bad year. He only grossed about $20,000. We have a house(no not a big fancy one) and 2 cars and 2 kids. I had to quite my job bacause what I was making, was not covering the daycare expence. We lost our health & life insurence. We got the kids put on the state health insurence. But only for the year that we needed it. My husbend pays out of his a@@ for taxes every year, so we have well paid back the state. If you need the help like I did that's fine, just don't abuse it. Or one day there might not be a system here to help you!

 

[Heretic]

Disability

My neighbor has been on disability for years. He pays the mortgage on a 3br house worth approx $120k, has two cars a 1996 Pontiac Bonnaville and a 2001 Buick Lesabre (he bought it brand new). Funny thing is he says he has a bad back but yet I see him digging in the yard, playing basketball, and bent over the hood of his car working on it. He also has two kids in college, one in John Hopkins medical school. Oh yea he also just got a big screen TV to watch the superbowl on this year since he said last year was the last time he could go to it live.

Yea its pretty tough to make ends meet when on Social Security disability.

 

[RoseRed]

Sounds like a "little birdie" should make a call to SS and have this guy investigated.

 

[vraiblonde]

Tonio, I feel that if you are taking government money, you have made yourself a ward of the state. If you are a ward of the state, you must abide by the "house rules", one of which should be no more reproducing on our dime. Frankly, women who can't support their kids shouldn't have them anyway. I'd be curious why a woman on welfare would want to have more kids she can't take care of.

I'm all for my tax $$ going to help people get back on their feet after a derailment - but they have to be making positive steps toward independence.

 

[Tonio]

I feel that if you are taking government money, you have made yourself a ward of the state.

No argument there, vrai. That's why I think long-term public assistance should only be for people who can't support themselves, not for those who won't support themselves. People on welfare who can work ought to be working.

I'll rule out for a moment those women whose birth control breaks down, or whose boyfriends pressure them into having unprotected sex. We're talking only about the women who would deliberately have children while on welfare. Truly a waste of the taxpayers' money. So why not change the welfare system so these and other freeloaders are kept off the dole to begin with?

Ken, can you point me to the information on sterilization? I read a scary article recently about the old eugenics laws in Virginia and other states. I don't think you're referring to those, of course. Still, many in government thought at one time that sterilizing unwed mothers and orphans was in the public interest.

 

[Shanobi]

2002 Reform Going the Wrong Way

THere are a few things about this new proposed welfare bill that I just can't stomach. First of all, Republicans want to increase the work hours from 30 hrs/wk to 40 hrs/wk. This means that to qualify for Food Stamps and Cash Assistance one must be working a minimum of 40 hours. We're talking about a majority of unskilled workers here. People who will end up in fast food or retail. You know how many employees are given 40 hours a week in fast food or retial? Hardly any. They will have to get 2 jobs. Why isn't 30 hours a week satisfactory? This is gonna disqualify a lot of people and they'll slip throught the cracks alltogether.
And the daycare money? You better give more funding. Everyone needs daycare assistance. People are paying $500/mo for daycare. After rent and daycare yer broke. And it's not just single mothers. Working families need daycare. 2 parent families need daycare because the housewife days are well over. Both parents need to be working just to make ends meet. If yer gonna force someone to work then ya better have them work for something more than just to be able to afford to put their kid in daycare.
And that last article states that job training will no longer be a "work activity"...This gives the poverty stricken no time to better themselves because they have to spend every waking hour working. What about substance abuse treatment? Family counselling? THese will no longer be acceptable activities to substitute for work? Are the poor being slowly turned into worker bees?
Yes, great way to reform welfare...make it so that very few will qualify...That will make reform look great on paper

 

[Sharon]

Why isn't 30 hours a week satisfactory?

Most people work 40 hrs/wk, why shouldn't they? If they have to work 5-10 hrs/wk at a second job, so be it.

2 parent families need daycare because the housewife days are well over. Both parents need to be working.

Simply not true.

If yer gonna force someone to work, then ya better have them work for something more than just to be able to afford to put their kid in daycare.

Who exactly, owes them a higher paying job? If you're just breaking even, stay home and take care of your own kids. This won't work for single-parent families though, that's where having the 2nd job come in.