Public Assistance - how long is long enough?

Mom2Alex · Dec 1, 2008

DD2008 said:
Enlisted military families qualify for WIC. We were on WIC when my firstborn was little and I was in the Air Force. We would have been in bad shape without it.

Yep, sadly it is the standard for military families. My friend was told when he was in the Marines and was stationed with a growing family on a base to see that the first thing they did was sign up for WIC. I received WIC for the first 4 months when I had our son.

stone · Dec 1, 2008

DD2008 · Dec 1, 2008

Mom2Alex said:
Thanks for expanding upon the issue. I agree, for those with physical or mental disabilities full support needs to be there permanently or as long as the affliction lasts. My mother (single) needed back surgery and did not qualify for any help - her disability wasn't fatal and wasn't going to be permanent - 8 months didn't qualify.

Can you explain what you mean - perhaps give examples - of how people who take advantage of the system would not do so if they were better cared for? I know of local agencies which embrace these folks to the point of coddling. I worked for a community action center - and a Head Start program - I know first-hand who the recipients are and how the programs operate.

When I look at what my grandparents and their families went through during the great depression - and how there was no such thing as multi-generational dole-takers. I don't think public assistance programs were created to make people dependent, but many have become so.

How do you think the system should be improved where it will help those who need help for as long as they are down and out, but help to lift them out of the nest so that they can take care of themselves - which certainly instills a self-worth of immeasurable value?

What is broke? What shouldn't be 'fixed'?

Well, I'll divide this into catagories.

1. The government assistance stops at financial assistance, training, etc. The treatment of people in general is a sickness of society. It's society in general that isn't a cohesive unit. If people were to follow the example of Christ and love their neighbor we wouldn't have these kinds of issues, and people who are armed with self confidence and pride at being accepted in their communities are more likely to strive for honesty and contribution.

2. Our grandparents were a people that had more community values in general than we do today, in my opinion. The way they all supported one another through the depression. (There is a woman sitting a cube away from me right now who was born in a tent beside the red river during the depression. She was delivered by their neighbor who also was living in a tent. All they had was hot river water mutual encouragement and prayer.) Why can we not support people like that? What happened to the front porch forum?

3. Love your neighbor as yourself is broken. What shouldn't be "fixed" is unlimited gov assistance. If we do our part as a community we take the load off of the government.

ukok · Dec 1, 2008

DD2008 said:
Well, I'll divide this into catagories.

1. The government assistance stops at financial assistance, training, etc. The treatment of people in general is a sickness of society. It's society in general that isn't a cohesive unit. If people were to follow the example of Christ and love their neighbor we wouldn't have these kinds of issues, and people who are armed with self confidence and pride at being accepted in their communities are more likely to strive for honesty and contribution.

2. Our grandparents were a people that had more community values in general than we do today, in my opinion. The way they all supported one another through the depression. (There is a woman sitting a cube away from me right now who was born in a tent beside the red river during the depression. She was delivered by their neighbor who also was living in a tent. All they had was hot river water mutual encouragement and prayer.) Why can we not support people like that? What happened to the front porch forum?

3. Love your neighbor as yourself is broken. What shouldn't be "fixed" is unlimited gov assistance. If we do our part as a community we take the load off of the government.

Well said

faerieevaH · Dec 1, 2008

DD2008 said:
Ok. That's fair.

I think we should let them have the checks forever. I believe that it is right for society to give people th dignity of the benefit of the doubt. If you make a policy to take away support you will find that you are not punishing able bodied rogues but punishing in most cases able bodied failures who are legitimatly trying, just making bad decisions or having bad luck.

So, I think if someone is going to take advantage of the system leave it to his conscience.

If our society was more community involved and family oriented there wouldn't be a problem. The teachings of Christ are the solution to all of our problems. Not punishment by legislation.

I agree with much of what you say... I really like the fact that you speak of 'able bodies failures'. Someone being a failure, whether morally or psychologicaly is indeed not enough justification for us to pull our hands off them and say: "well then, just let them die".

On the other hand, I do think we would fail these people too if we gave up on their chances to better themselves and move out of this cycle. I think we should keep up and keep trying, even accepting the fact that some will never get out, because they lack the desire to get out.
In Antwerp, San Egidio works with the homeless and one of the most inspiring testimonies I have ever heard is by someone named Pieter who worked with me in confirmation class. He said that San Egidio tries and help the homeless to get out of their current situation. Aside from the actual practical help it gives (meals, clothes, simple comfort and someone to talk to) It tries to connect them with the right programs, to help them and get them out of their position of need. The success rate is minimal because of the multitude of problems (some being atitude) and in a way it can be frustrating to help build someone up to the point where he has a home adress, a job, a somewhat stable life and a point to begin to start all over. Only to see them back where they were, with their hands out, a few months later. BUT... and here is the beauty of it... Pieter says that even in that situation they are people. Even if they messed up, continue to mess up and will mess up until their dying day, these are human beings infused with the dignity of God.

That is why I think of both sides of the issue... on one hand we will have to accept that some people will never lead a fruitful, productive, giving life. And we can feel pity (I always hear people react against pity, but it is a beautiful non condescending emotion in it's purest form) on them and help them. On the other hand it is our duty too to lead everyone who is in a position of need to a place where they will not need it anymore. It is said that it is better to give than to receive. I firmly believe that everyone who can give rather than receive is more sincerely and deeply happy.

Some people will need assistance their entire life through, due to illness or handicap, but most often these are people that are already giving so much of themselves in their daily life that no one (okay, very few people) would begrudge them any monetary assistance that they may need.

Veritas · Dec 1, 2008

I don't think the issue is one of a time-limit as much as someone being given money to do nothing....even if they are able. Jesus very clearly said, "he who will not work, should not eat". For those that are truly destitute, some assistance is needed. But NOWHERE in the bible does it say it is the State's responsibility to care for the poor. It is the responsibility of individual's like you and me to personally help those who can't help themselves.

People forget that in the US long before we had the Welfare State, there were private charities. (You should read about the history of charity in the US; it's quite interesting) Through the efforts of Churches, institutions and individuals, people were given shelter, clothing and food. But it wasn't "FREE". You had to help the organization/person if possible by cooking, cleaning, sewing, chopping wood, painting, etc. to earn your keep. In those days, any self-respecting person would consider it below their dignity to be given a handout. They would insist on doing something for the help they received.

Today, people expect the nameless, faceless entity called government to send them a check, food stamps or whatever else they need, without having to do anything. But we are the government, we pay the money that goes into somebody else's pocket. We worked for what someone else didn't. There is little to no gratitude involved much less responsibility. This type of system kills the work ethic and the person's soul. By nature, every human being realizes they must produce or contribute in some way to society. Even disabled people have dignity and deserve a chance to prove whatever abilities they have. No one should be robbed of this.

On a personal note (and I've shared this before) my sister and her husband have 7 kids. She had quads, twins and a singleton all in 3 years. That's a family of 9 people on one income. They have qualified for all sorts of gov. assistance including food stamps, WIC, basic health, etc. But they have refused all of it because they didn't think it was societies responsibility to care the children they created. So for many years now, my BIL has worked 2 jobs to support his family and still be a model father. I have many gripes with them, but I have always admired their hardwork and self-sufficiency. Naturally, the extended family mostly both grandparents and myself have done our part to help out. These kids don't have a lot, but they have never been deprived of the really important things.

drpepper101 · Dec 1, 2008

Veritas said:
I don't think the issue is one of a time-limit as much as someone being given money to do nothing....even if they are able. Jesus very clearly said, "he who will not work, should not eat". For those that are truly destitute, some assistance is needed. But NOWHERE in the bible does it say it is the State's responsibility to care for the poor. It is the responsibility of individual's like you and me to personally help those who can't help themselves.

People forget that in the US long before we had the Welfare State, there were private charities. (You should read about the history of charity in the US; it's quite interesting) Through the efforts of Churches, institutions and individuals, people were given shelter, clothing and food. But it wasn't "FREE". You had to help the organization/person if possible by cooking, cleaning, sewing, chopping wood, painting, etc. to earn your keep. In those days, any self-respecting person would consider it below their dignity to be given a handout. They would insist on doing something for the help they received.

Today, people expect the nameless, faceless entity called government to send them a check, food stamps or whatever else they need, without having to do anything. But we are the government, we pay the money that goes into somebody else's pocket. We worked for what someone else didn't. There is little to no gratitude involved much less responsibility. This type of system kills the work ethic and the person's soul. By nature, every human being realizes they must produce or contribute in some way to society. Even disabled people have dignity and deserve a chance to prove whatever abilities they have. No one should be robbed of this.

On a personal note (and I've shared this before) my sister and her husband have 7 kids. She had quads, twins and a singleton all in 3 years. That's a family of 9 people on one income. They have qualified for all sorts of gov. assistance including food stamps, WIC, basic health, etc. But they have refused all of it because they didn't think it was societies responsibility to care the children they created. So for many years now, my BIL has worked 2 jobs to support his family and still be a model father. I have many gripes with them, but I have always admired their hardwork and self-sufficiency. Naturally, the extended family mostly both grandparents and myself have done our part to help out. These kids don't have a lot, but they have never been deprived of the really important things.

Actually that was St. Paul and he was speaking to Christian groups that believed Jesus' second coming was very near and had stopped working their land and earning their own food in favor of becoming basically an anicent doomsday cult.
Americans in general rattle on about hard work, and there is some virtue to it. But there's an equal measure of vice, of the ill effects over work has on a person mentally and physically, of the years of life you loose, and of the things you miss out on. One of the greatest aspects of our technical progress is that we don't work nearly as hard as people used to have to work. A big part of the reward for it is that we live a lot longer because we don't abuse our bodies with 10-12 hour days six days a week. Anyone working significant over time, or second and third jobs, is missing out on time with their kids and family. I'm not inclined to praise that just because it means they aren't using a social program which is going to be there whether they use it or not.

Fish and Bread · Dec 1, 2008

Veritas said:
Jesus very clearly said, "he who will not work, should not eat".

Where?

But NOWHERE in the bible does it say it is the State's responsibility to care for the poor.

The bible says we have a collective obligation to the poor. Catholic social teaching says that governments have an obligation to the poor. In a democracy, both are applicable, as a modern democracy is both a government and an expression of our collective will.

Also, your icon says you are Protestant now. Is that true? If so, when did this happen?

Annabel Lee · Dec 1, 2008

Mom2Alex said:
I live in a 'nanny' state (NY) where people can receive public assistance for an unlimited period of time - an unlimited amount of money over a lifetime as an adult. The people are encouraged to seek work and if they fail to look for work, their check is sanctioned 25%. I worked for the Head Start program some years ago and we had children in program who received public assistance, their mother's mother received public assistance, etc. The family clearly did not learn to strive because they were raised wholly dependent upon others.

As a child, we never received a welfare check, but we did have to receive food stamps and heat assistance for a time until we got on our feet.

Your charitable discourse is appreciated.

I think it is an obligation for a nation to see that people have a soft place to land when they fall until they can stand on their own. What if the people do not want to stand on their own? Ever? How long is long enough to receive public assistance?

Excluding physical or mental disabilities, I think there should be a limit on the amount of government charity a person can receive.

My mother was a widow with three small children and managed to stay off of welfare. She had an extended family, which I'm sure helped keep us off of the dole.
It just wasn't done. My grandparents came from Ireland, my grandmother at 15 years old. She worked as a maid in NYC to send money home to her widowed mother and 9 younger siblings.
I can't even begin to compete with that kind of work ethic.

We could have received food stamps or WIC, back in the day when my husband and I were teenage parents, but he would have nothing to do with it.

Let me read the rest of this thread and see if I'm missing something.

Mom2Alex · Dec 1, 2008

deleted - wrong place

Mom2Alex · Dec 1, 2008

Pope John Paul II, resuming his travels outside the Vatican today after an illness, strongly defended workers' rights and warned of the dangers of "easy welfare."

The time has come "for a new policy of social solidarity, which has nothing to do with easy welfare, which in the long-run is harmful to the needy themselves," the Pope told a crowd of 5,000

Source

Mom2Alex · Dec 1, 2008

We must not pass over the unwarranted and unmerited appeal made by some to the Apostle when he said: "If any man will not work neither let him eat." For the Apostle is passing judgment on those who are unwilling to work, although they can and ought to, and he admonishes us that we ought diligently to use our time and energies of body, and mind and not be a burden to others when we can provide for ourselves. But the Apostle in no wise teaches that labor is the sole title to a living or an income.

Source

Mom2Alex · Dec 1, 2008

On our social responsibility to children:

Let us use all the means that modern progress offers or recommends. Let new methods be devised which may, through the cooperation of all provide an effective remedy for present ills and for those which are feared in the future. Thus, may it speedily come about that with God's help and inspiration the snares of vice, which hold so many derelict children as an easy prey, may give way to the attraction of a virtuous life; that their blank idleness and gloomy sloth may give way to honest and cheerful employment; that for their hunger, starvation and nakedness they may have adequate relief from the Divine charity of Jesus Christ, which should be most alive, eager and strong among His followers at a time like this.

Source

WarriorAngel · Dec 1, 2008

DD2008 said:
Congratulations on living in a state with a good system.

If we can get more Democrats in office maybe the 44 backward states can finally get something done that is beneficial to the people.

So if everyone is on welfare - who pays the taxes to keep the system going?

What about the workers who get up at 4-5 AM to get ready to go to work thru all sorts of weather...?

Are they less entitled to have their own money because the [most often unwilling] do not work- and thus the taxes are increased to support those who dont want to work?
And fwiw - where i lived - most of the folks on welfare were doing so imho illegally.

Women living with b/f's so they could collect a welfare check from every child they had...
Remaining unmarried so they could get the checks while having children out of wedlock. And all the while the guys were working making good money.
[I cannot recall the total sum of welfare moms i knew - but it would amaze you]

Welfare promotes immorality. Children out of wedlock - couples never getting married and cheating on the other anyway, lying about living together to collect money from hard working individuals. [Notice its not from the government - because the government doesnt earn that money - the workers do]

And please - i knew so many welfare moms - that peeps cannot give me stats that i will ever find credible.
And my sis works in a hospital where the frequent 'mom's' are crack addicts and would rather take the welfare check and sell it [the ebt card] to others so she can have her fix and the baby drinks cola in the bottle cos its cheaper.

So the ebt 'welfare cards' arent really working. IF the 'poor' would go to work, they would have a lot less time for sleeping around and getting high on free money.

Just imo - from what i know and see.

Fish and Bread · Dec 1, 2008

The Epistle of St. James:

15 If a brother or sister has nothing to wear and has no food for the day, 16 and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well," but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it?

Veritas · Dec 1, 2008

drpepper101 said:
Actually that was St. Paul and he was speaking to Christian groups that believed Jesus' second coming was very near and had stopped working their land and earning their own food in favor of becoming basically an anicent doomsday cult.
Americans in general rattle on about hard work, and there is some virtue to it. But there's an equal measure of vice, of the ill effects over work has on a person mentally and physically, of the years of life you loose, and of the things you miss out on. One of the greatest aspects of our technical progress is that we don't work nearly as hard as people used to have to work. A big part of the reward for it is that we live a lot longer because we don't abuse our bodies with 10-12 hour days six days a week. Anyone working significant over time, or second and third jobs, is missing out on time with their kids and family. I'm not inclined to praise that just because it means they aren't using a social program which is going to be there whether they use it or not.

I wouldn't judge situations you know nothing about. Although not ideal, anyone who works extra jobs and to support their family needs to be extolled vs. those who do nothing. Which is the better example to set for one's kids?

Mom2Alex said:
Source

I appreciate your looking up papal writings regarding the subject. JPII was alluding to what I was trying to say in that welfare and lack of productivity kills the soul. God did not create man for idleness, but rather work annd contribution to mankind. All honest work is dignified and reflects the glory of God.

WarriorAngel said:
So if everyone is on welfare - who pays the taxes to keep the system going?

What about the workers who get up at 4-5 AM to get ready to go to work thru all sorts of weather...?

Are they less entitled to have their own money because the [most often unwilling] do not work- and thus the taxes are increased to support those who dont want to work?
And fwiw - where i lived - most of the folks on welfare were doing so imho illegally.

Women living with b/f's so they could collect a welfare check from every child they had...
Remaining unmarried so they could get the checks while having children out of wedlock. And all the while the guys were working making good money.
[I cannot recall the total sum of welfare moms i knew - but it would amaze you]

Welfare promotes immorality. Children out of wedlock - couples never getting married and cheating on the other anyway, lying about living together to collect money from hard working individuals. [Notice its not from the government - because the government doesnt earn that money - the workers do]

And please - i knew so many welfare moms - that peeps cannot give me stats that i will ever find credible.
And my sis works in a hospital where the frequent 'mom's' are crack addicts and would rather take the welfare check and sell it [the ebt card] to others so she can have her fix and the baby drinks cola in the bottle cos its cheaper.

So the ebt 'welfare cards' arent really working. IF the 'poor' would go to work, they would have a lot less time for sleeping around and getting high on free money.

Just imo - from what i know and see.

Great points!

Welfare is a disincentive to work. In fact, if someone paid me to do nothing, I would! Well, probably not since my conscience would get to me after a while. But seriously, there is so much fraud and waste in all social service programs. I notice that left-leaning social spending advocates rarely ever mention any type of program to clean up the welfare rolls. There interest is in taxing the haves to give to the havenots. Other than for those who truly need it and IN EXCHANGE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE, wealth redistribution is against both biblical and comprehensive Catholic teaching. I completely reject Liberation Theology because it's Marxist and uses extreme oppressive regimes as justification.

DD2008 · Dec 2, 2008

WarriorAngel said:
So if everyone is on welfare - who pays the taxes to keep the system going?

.

The goal is for welfare to be a temporary net for those who need it to get back on their feet.

I understand Republicanss don't like social programs and want to keep all of their own money instead of contributing to the government for the benefit of the people. That's why we just voted them out of every office in the land.

I reject the notion that life is a game and we are all in competition. I believe that our system is set up as a unified system that benefits all of the people not just the one.

"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." John F. Kennedy.

The first thing a Republican must embrace is self before country. The first thing a Democrat must embrace is country before self. I believe that social progression lies with the Democratic ideals.

So I think we should safeguard our social programs for those who need them without limit.

The rest is up to us. If we take care of each other there is no reason that the government will have to. We need to love our neighbor if change is gonna come.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4I--3tFzyLI

drpepper101 · Dec 2, 2008

Veritas said:
I wouldn't judge situations you know nothing about. Although not ideal, anyone who works extra jobs and to support their family needs to be extolled vs. those who do nothing. Which is the better example to set for one's kids?

That's rather like saying I should get rid of my washing machine because washing my clothes by hand is harder and therefore some how better. If you're working full time (40-50 hours a week) and not making ends meet there's nothing wrong with taking some help. I don't see any good example in teaching children to work themselves to death or to spend 70+ hours a week working. It strongly enforces negative gender stereotypes and teaches little boys their only value in the family is the money they bring home and they are in essence disposible worker bees.
It's quite sad when you hear older people that lived very interesting lives and yet define themselves so much by trival employment because we've been conditioned to value work for the sake of it. In short, teaching kids to take help when they need it is no vice and teaching kids to be worker bees is no virtue.

I appreciate your looking up papal writings regarding the subject. JPII was alluding to what I was trying to say in that welfare and lack of productivity kills the soul. God did not create man for idleness, but rather work annd contribution to mankind. All honest work is dignified and reflects the glory of God.

Actually work is the result of sin. Adam and Eve lived at lesuire in the garden, it wasn't until they transgressed that God cursed them to earn their living by the sweat of their brow. God didn't create man to be a worker bee.
Gen 3:17-19:
"Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life.
"Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field;
By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return."

benedictaoo · Dec 2, 2008

Mom2Alex said:
I live in a 'nanny' state (NY) where people can receive public assistance for an unlimited period of time - an unlimited amount of money over a lifetime as an adult. The people are encouraged to seek work and if they fail to look for work, their check is sanctioned 25%. I worked for the Head Start program some years ago and we had children in program who received public assistance, their mother's mother received public assistance, etc. The family clearly did not learn to strive because they were raised wholly dependent upon others.

As a child, we never received a welfare check, but we did have to receive food stamps and heat assistance for a time until we got on our feet.

Your charitable discourse is appreciated.

I think it is an obligation for a nation to see that people have a soft place to land when they fall until they can stand on their own. What if the people do not want to stand on their own? Ever? How long is long enough to receive public assistance?

I think these polices are why we have so much poverty and it's anti American to not allow a person to go out and make himself a good living.

I'm all for assistance but we need to encourage ppl to go to school or to work and get on top of the bill situation and then wean them off assistance. It's just retarded that it's either you work or you collect public assistance. ppl will never be able to get off it if and on their feet if they are penalized when they do work.

Mississippi is doing something like this and it's worked pretty good. They were able to get so many ppl off it and Katrina sadly knocked them back down.

Veritas · Dec 2, 2008

drpepper101 said:
That's rather like saying I should get rid of my washing machine because washing my clothes by hand is harder and therefore some how better. If you're working full time (40-50 hours a week) and not making ends meet there's nothing wrong with taking some help. I don't see any good example in teaching children to work themselves to death or to spend 70+ hours a week working. It strongly enforces negative gender stereotypes and teaches little boys their only value in the family is the money they bring home and they are in essence disposible worker bees.
It's quite sad when you hear older people that lived very interesting lives and yet define themselves so much by trival employment because we've been conditioned to value work for the sake of it. In short, teaching kids to take help when they need it is no vice and teaching kids to be worker bees is no virtue.

Actually work is the result of sin. Adam and Eve lived at lesuire in the garden, it wasn't until they transgressed that God cursed them to earn their living by the sweat of their brow. God didn't create man to be a worker bee.
Gen 3:17-19:
"Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life.
"Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field;
By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return."

Oh I get it. If man never sinned, we would never have needed to work. Stupid me. I guess the food would have gathered itself, the children from birth would be self-sufficient, we would never have needed any shelter, running water, fire or any heat. All of the progess which we have seen over thousands of years would have been completely unncessary because God would have done it all! We would just sit back and enjoy the fruits of His labour. :doh:

The thing is, when you look at people who live in the jungle today, they don't have any jobs for pay and virtually no modern conveniences, yet they work very hard....often from sun up to sun down. The women of course, work much harder than the men and God never said they would have to toil. But I digress. Earth to drpepper: we are living in the 21st century and people everywhere must work to live. Unless of course, they are blessed enough to live in a country that pays them not to.

Public Assistance - how long is long enough?

In Christ

Senior Contributor

Well-Known Member

Freaked out, insecure, neurotic and Emotional

lucky wife

1 Lord, 1 Faith, 1 Baptism

Senior Member

Dona nobis pacem

Beware the Thought Police

In Christ

In Christ

In Christ

In Christ

I close my eyes and see you smile

Dona nobis pacem

1 Lord, 1 Faith, 1 Baptism

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Legend

1 Lord, 1 Faith, 1 Baptism

Similar threads