Tuesday, March 08, 2005
Welfare
::Edit::
This is either borderline satire or what I really think. I'm not even sure.
::/Edit::
Here's an idea for some welfare reform. Coming from a conservative, I am not a welfare fan. The general idea is fine with me, actually. The problem I have is the incentives in place, specifically cash. If a single mother of two is on welfare, I don't want to pay for another bundle of joy. It is unethical to reproduce if you can't even sustain the children you already have. And since when did general welfare mean money? If there's one thing people on welfare don't need it's money, instead they need a job which they work for such a luxury.
How about this, potentially cheap option: instead of giving welfare recipients tax dollars (most of which gets sucked up by the federal and state machines, fun fact of the day is that only 17% of the money given to welfare actually makes it to the recipients), why doesn't the government give them food? How about shelter? Clothing? If they need anything else, they have to work for it. But for the general welfare recipient, he/she is given food stamps, not money for junk food. They're given an appartment, not money for a new car. They're given clothing (and we're not talking the latest fashion). I don't mean to sound insensitive, but if you don't need welfare, you shouldn't be on it, and you shouldn't want to be on it. A welfare recipient should feel a little bit ashamed at being unable to support himself and his family.
But there is hope! Millions of welfare recipients are capable of some form of work. Teacher's aides, and other low skilled jobs can be filled easily and affordably. This is a way to give them not just food, clothing and shelter, but also some spending money. Just a thought, I'll get a little bit more in depth after class.
This is either borderline satire or what I really think. I'm not even sure.
::/Edit::
Here's an idea for some welfare reform. Coming from a conservative, I am not a welfare fan. The general idea is fine with me, actually. The problem I have is the incentives in place, specifically cash. If a single mother of two is on welfare, I don't want to pay for another bundle of joy. It is unethical to reproduce if you can't even sustain the children you already have. And since when did general welfare mean money? If there's one thing people on welfare don't need it's money, instead they need a job which they work for such a luxury.
How about this, potentially cheap option: instead of giving welfare recipients tax dollars (most of which gets sucked up by the federal and state machines, fun fact of the day is that only 17% of the money given to welfare actually makes it to the recipients), why doesn't the government give them food? How about shelter? Clothing? If they need anything else, they have to work for it. But for the general welfare recipient, he/she is given food stamps, not money for junk food. They're given an appartment, not money for a new car. They're given clothing (and we're not talking the latest fashion). I don't mean to sound insensitive, but if you don't need welfare, you shouldn't be on it, and you shouldn't want to be on it. A welfare recipient should feel a little bit ashamed at being unable to support himself and his family.
But there is hope! Millions of welfare recipients are capable of some form of work. Teacher's aides, and other low skilled jobs can be filled easily and affordably. This is a way to give them not just food, clothing and shelter, but also some spending money. Just a thought, I'll get a little bit more in depth after class.
