welfare

[javan]

not a new issue but when is it finally going to be fixed?

we have overpopulation of the world around the corner yet we the open the doors to these people having babies just to get welfare. the more kids they have the more welfare they get so they have more and more and more babies. our country knows this is going on. so why not stop it this instant? what are we waiting for? if a man was breaking into your home would you wait to call the cops? no you would do it that second.

 

[Vylo]

This is a fallacy. The vast majority of people on welfare would not consider having children just to obtain it or more, since it is economically unfeasible except through neglecting the children. While it does indeed occur, it is not common place.

Welfare does indeed however, need some overhauls to make it more encouraging towards self-reliance.

 

[Voegelin]

we have overpopulation of the world around the corner

Just the opposite. Depopulation is the problem. The UN revised its global population figures from 2.1 (replacement level) to 1.85. Japan briefly sunk into a negative population growth earlier this year. Russia and Italy are at 1.2. Russia had 148 million people in 1992. By 2015 it will have less than 130 million. By 2050, under 100 million. Spain is at 1.1 (which means its population halves every generation). Seventeen countries in Europe are at are below 1.3 births per woman. India and China and other countries considered "overpopulated" average around 2.9 but are dropping fast.

 

[Gracchus]

Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

KJV Matthew 5:42

Our official economic policy is that we cannot afford full employment. It drives up the price of labor and cuts profits.

Welfare will be fixed when we provide jobs that pay a living wage for everyone who can do a job, and provide decent food, clothing, and housing for the rest.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

And when's the last time that the government either borrowed money or asked for money?

Giving you either a choice of going to prison or giving them money doesn't count.

 

[Gracchus]

And when's the last time that the government either borrowed money or asked for money?

ROFLSHINSM

Giving you either a choice of going to prison or giving them money doesn't count.

Maybe not to you.

 

[mwb]

Reminds me of social security.

 

[français]

yes, there are some lazy people who take advantage of welfare, but you know, there are also others who just can't get a job, and who are caring people, and who deserve welfare.

we shouldn't cut welfare because a few people take advantage of it. No. however instead of just giving people money, we should improve schools so kids can actually have a progressive future, we need to spend more on homeless shelters , and we need to create more unity. giving welfare won't jsut do the trick.

i think welfare is needed in our society. america, altho a major rich country, also has a major poor population, and we need to change it. cutting welfare, and cutting this and that and calling the homeless poor and lazy isn't going to cut it.

 

[Lugus]

I have no reason to doubt that many countries have reproductive rates below the necessary replacement level. However, I also believe that many countries have reproductive rates that greatly exceed necessary replacement.

Wikepedia gives the fertility rates of different countries at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate . Note that the highest fertility rates are African, Muslim, and Hispanic countries. Thus, some of the poorest countries in the world are having the largest families. If each generation survives to adulthood and if these rates continue, the world’s population will soon begin to explode.

Just as the different countries have varying fertility rates, so too do the racial and ethic groups within these countries. Thus, it should not be a surprise to anyone that the people who can least afford to have children are typically the ones having the largest families.

Most of the people reading this post will probably agree that parents should not have children that they can not take care of. Thus, birth control pills, sterilization, Norplant, etc. should be available, encouraged, and in some cases required. (A good start would be to require some form of birth control for violent felons or for chronic welfare recipients.)

Why should we ask less of others than we would ask of ourselves? The reader should ask him or herself, “Would I have children that I can not take and which are sure to be a burden to others?”

 

[billwald]

(Even) during WW2 there was close to 2% unemployment.

 

[susanann]

As long as Americans choose to export US jobs to china and close American factories and decrease the number of real jobs over here, and as long as Americans want to increase our population by 50,000 additional immigrants each week, then they must accept increasing welfare costs as part of the price that has to be paid in order to buy cheap chinese junk at Walmart and in order to pay for over population.

Increasing mouths to feed by additional millions of immigrants each year, and moving millions of jobs to china and india each year, requires higher and higher welfare costs for more and more people needing welfare.

 

[ElvisFan42]

As long as Americans choose to export US jobs to china and close American factories and decrease the number of real jobs over here, and as long as Americans want to increase our population by 50,000 additional immigrants each week, then they must accept increasing welfare costs as part of the price that has to be paid in order to buy cheap chinese junk at Walmart and in order to pay for over population.

Increasing mouths to feed by additional millions of immigrants each year, and moving millions of jobs to china and india each year, requires higher and higher welfare costs for more and more people needing welfare.

Somebody get's the basic math!



For the OP

You do realize that if you have an issue with people on welfare too long, that it's a problem in your state? The fed only provides welfare for a period of five years over a persons entire life. Also, Medicare and medicaid are part of our welfare system, and if you look at the numbers, there will be a lot more old people than young people in 20-30 years.

 

[Dale]

Indeed, hasn't welfare as a Federal entitlement been ended?

 

[Gracchus]

Somebody get's the basic math!



For the OP

You do realize that if you have an issue with people on welfare too long, that it's a problem in your state? The fed only provides welfare for a period of five years over a persons entire life. Also, Medicare and medicaid are part of our welfare system, and if you look at the numbers, there will be a lot more old people than young people in 20-30 years.

Except of course for children. The children are elegible for aid until age eighteen. So what happens is that a single mother with four kids gets the minimum basic standard of adequate care for four persons. This will not really decently support four children. But five persons will have to live on it. Is this wrong?

3 We are orphans and fatherless, our mothers are as widows.
4 We have drunken our water for money; our wood is sold unto us.

--- KJV Lamentations 5


If mom gets a job for minimum wage, she has to pay for child care. If she works full time a portion of what she earns is deducted from the aid paid for the children. America is a heartless, pitiless nation, ruled by greedy men, elected by selfish and heartless people.

What does the Lord demand?

And the Levite, (because he hath no part nor inheritance with thee,) and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, which are within thy gates, shall come, and shall eat and be satisfied; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hand which thou doest.

--- KJV Deuteronommy 14:29

I will never forgive any god who forgives this heartless greed.

 

[ElvisFan42]

Except of course for children. The children are elegible for aid until age eighteen. So what happens is that a single mother with four kids gets the minimum basic standard of adequate care for four persons. This will not really decently support four children. But five persons will have to live on it. Is this wrong?



--- KJV Lamentations 5


If mom gets a job for minimum wage, she has to pay for child care. If she works full time a portion of what she earns is deducted from the aid paid for the children. America is a heartless, pitiless nation, ruled by greedy men, elected by selfish and heartless people.

What does the Lord demand?



--- KJV Deuteronommy 14:29

I will never forgive any god who forgives this heartless greed.

I understand what you are saying, but welfare has to contain a balance between taking care of the truly needy and not rewarding the lazy. I'm not sure what the answer for that is, but that should be the goal.

 

[susanann]

I understand what you are saying, but welfare has to contain a balance between taking care of the truly needy and not rewarding the lazy. I'm not sure what the answer for that is, but that should be the goal.

I am not sure anyone can tell the difference between truely needy and lazy any more.

I know so many people who have lost their jobs because their office or factory moved to china or india, and they cannot find work, even though they want to work.

This is especially true of older people. IF your factory or business moved to asia, and you are 49 years old, 57 years old, or 63 years old, very few businesses will hire you - they all want younger workers. Retraining for someone in their 50's is also a joke, even if they could afford to go back to college - there are tons of fresh good looking young college graduates to compete against. Every job, any job, that opens has hundreds of applicants, so most people who are still looking for a job dont get the job.

 

[susanann]

Also, Medicare and medicaid are part of our welfare system,

Medicare is not considered to be welfare, it is the same as social security.

Workers have deductions taken out of their pay every week of their working life for medicare. People pay tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars over their working career for social security and medicare, with compound interest it adds up to be a big sum of money. Getting back just some of the money that you paid in ( for those fortunate enough to live to the SS retirement age of 67 or more), is not welfare.

 

[ElvisFan42]

I am not sure anyone can tell the difference between truely needy and lazy any more.

Unfortunately, that is very true. The truly needy are being penalized for the scumbags that take advantage of the system. While that's a shame, it's not right to penalize the people that provide for the system either. We need a way to make the abusers penalized.

I know so many people who have lost their jobs because their office or factory moved to china or india, and they cannot find work, even though they want to work.

This is especially true of older people. IF your factory or business moved to asia, and you are 49 years old, 57 years old, or 63 years old, very few businesses will hire you - they all want younger workers. Retraining for someone in their 50's is also a joke, even if they could afford to go back to college - there are tons of fresh good looking young college graduates to compete against. Every job, any job, that opens has hundreds of applicants, so most people who are still looking for a job dont get the job.

All quite true.

Medicare is not considered to be welfare, it is the same as social security.

Workers have deductions taken out of their pay every week of their working life for medicare. People pay tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars over their working career for social security and medicare, with compound interest it adds up to be a big sum of money. Getting back just some of the money that you paid in ( for those fortunate enough to live to the SS retirement age of 67 or more), is not welfare.

I was under the impression Medicare was included in the amount considered welfare spending. I thought I saw it on one of those "where your tax dollars go" charts, but I may have been mistaken.

 

[susanann]

Originally Posted by susanann
Medicare is not considered to be welfare, it is the same as social security.

Workers have deductions taken out of their pay every week of their working life for medicare. People pay tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars over their working career for social security and medicare, with compound interest it adds up to be a big sum of money. Getting back just some of the money that you paid in ( for those fortunate enough to live to the SS retirement age of 67 or more), is not welfare.

I was under the impression Medicare was included in the amount considered welfare spending. I thought I saw it on one of those "where your tax dollars go" charts, but I may have been mistaken.

If you have a job, then look at your paycheck, and you will see that money is taken out of your pay for your social security and your medicare. Medicare and social security are the same programs.



(However, if you believe that medicare is welfare, then so is social security, and therefore, anyone, and everyone, who has saved any money in their lifetime should lose all their social security conributions and medicare contributions that they have been paying into for 40 years.

At the very least, even if we dont change the law and require a means test before returning social security and medicare benefits, then you yourself, if you believe it to be welfare, should refuse to get back YOUR social security and YOUR medicare benefits that you paid for.


I dont have any problem with anyone who voluntarily refuses to file for their social security and medicare benefits after they turn 67 because they consider it to be welfare )

 

[ElvisFan42]

Originally Posted by susanann
Medicare is not considered to be welfare, it is the same as social security.

Workers have deductions taken out of their pay every week of their working life for medicare. People pay tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars over their working career for social security and medicare, with compound interest it adds up to be a big sum of money. Getting back just some of the money that you paid in ( for those fortunate enough to live to the SS retirement age of 67 or more), is not welfare.




If you have a job, then look at your paycheck, and you will see that money is taken out of your pay for your social security and your medicare. Medicare and social security are the same programs.



(However, if you believe that medicare is welfare, then so is social security, and therefore, anyone, and everyone, who has saved any money in their lifetime should lose all their social security conributions and medicare contributions that they have been paying into for 40 years.

At the very least, even if we dont change the law and require a means test before returning social security and medicare benefits, then you yourself, if you believe it to be welfare, should refuse to get back YOUR social security and YOUR medicare benefits that you paid for.


I dont have any problem with anyone who voluntarily refuses to file for their social security and medicare benefits after they turn 67 because they consider it to be welfare )

I was not concerned with what I considered welfare, only what the government considers welfare.

Thanks for clearing it up.