Do you think that it should be a law if you get welfare you need to be checked for drugs? I do think that it should be. It is only right in my eyes since I am helping pay for these people whom many are lowlifes!
Drug testing, mandatory schooling, mandatory parenting classes, mandatory service hours....all should be required. Only once most of these people realize the free ride is over & they will have to work/earn their handouts will we see the cycle broken. The folks who are truly needy would probably have no problem with doing what they should do to earn the benefit. In Kentucky there is a state sponsored healthcare program for underprivileged people. Participation is voluntary but the people are required to contribute, earn their keep...my father runs the program in his county. Initially the response was overwhelming, until they found out they were going to have to work for it. My dad's "crew" was required to work 3 days a week at local food banks with childcare, transportation & meals included. The first day (early Jan) nearly 100 people showed up. Each day fewer & fewer people would turn out & risk being kicked out of the program. No one has shown up the last couple of weeks.
That sounds great, David! If able-bodied people receive welfare, they should contribute back somehow. That sounds like a good program!
Thats a realy sad reflection on society David, how does it make your Dad feel? (I know how it would make me feel but I would have to ban myself if I wrote it here) 3 days is not a lot specialy if you are getting fed and transported for free also it gets people into the habit of working again.
I agree that drug testing should be done and they should have to work somehow for it. I see too many people who are just looking for an easy way out. I know someone who complains that $600 is not enough food stamps in one month to feed a family. We manage to eat for under $300 a month and that is pushing it and we eat pretty good. Steak, chicken, veggies at every meal. Milk, coffee, juice. We get buy just fine. YOU do NOT need chips, cakes, and snacks or soda!
He's frustrated but not surprised. You wouldn't believe the stories...caught a few having sex, drinking, doing drugs, you name it. He said he was most surprised to hear what they were paying for the tattoos they were so proud of.
They're silent because of the old adage, "Better to keep you mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt".
Some twenty odd years ago I worked in the Rent To Own industry. Things like TVs, VCRs (in those days) appliances, furniture etc. I spent enough time in "impovershed" areas and I did, indeed, see pleny of what David describes. I spent a good deal of time in the south side of Chicago actually and "workfare" was being proposed at the time in Illinois. If I'm not mistaken folks would have been required to work 16 hours a week. Oh the complaints I heard from some people and this while I was frequently working 12 hour days. I am certainly no fan of welfare. I've seen the system abused first hand and always had a problem with it. I've also seen the single mother of three living in a project, working and going to school while getting food stamps. Believe it or not those people DO exist. In essence I totally agree with David having seen it first hand. Those that are physically capable of work should be required to in order to recieve benefits. Furthermore they should not be paid with any type of check. Payment should be on a card that would prevent them from spending money on booze, smokes, tatoos for cripes sake.
I can relate Angie. When I was in college, my girlfriend at the time, was a cashier in a grocery store. While people were buying steaks and shrimp we had a cookbook we used frequently. It was The Starving Student's Cookbook. We got by. Later in life my wife and I were in credit card debt. Not wise and our fault. Instead of declaring bankruptcy we did what we thought was the responsible thing. We contacted CCCS (Consumer Credit Counseling Service). We met with a rep, drafted a strict budget and you were required to make your payment absolutely on time or you were out. We managed that. Yes, the credit card companies did not get the full interest but they did get back every cent we owed them on purchases. Food is a huge part of the budget but it can be managed like you do Angie. My boss at the time gave me $20 on our anniversary and told me to take my wife out for dinner (this was years ago so a decent dinner was feasible). When she asked me where we went I was almost ashamed to tell her that we had gone to a butcher shop and bought a real nice roast. We cut the roast up and froze it. There is a local Korean market where I could get 25 pounds of rice for $7. We made a a lot of stir fry cheap. I was relieved when the boss was pleased that someone would actually spend the extra money that wisely. It can be done. Helps if you like rice and noodles.
I can relate Clembo. To this day I refuse to eat Ramen noodles or Vienna sausage because of my old college days. But you know, you did what you had to do & 20 years later we can call it the good old days.
I just find it riduculous that people complain they do not get enough in food stamps but yet are eating better than me! And I work hard for my money.
We went to the local IGA a couple of days ago and the lady ahead of us spent 130 bucks and put it on her Link Card (the IL food stamp debit card). Well, 126 went on the Link Card. Apparently, 4 dollars of whatever wasn't authorized. Which I can't imagine what that was since most of what she had appeared to be prepared, frozen stuff and soda. Anyway, when we got out to the parking lot, she was closing the back of her late model Hyundai Santa Fe. We paid cash for our stuff and got into my '94 Mercury Tracer. Whatever.
Doesnt the state get much of their welfare fund from the U S government? What is the state doing to earn it? And where does that money that is alloted to a certain amount of people on the welfare program go. Just wondering.hen the are deemd no longer quailfied? Does the state or county return the unused money to the feds?
So no money for anything? Even if they do the mandatory 16 hours of bs work? Not even like 12 dollars to maybe let one of their kids go to the movies if they do real well in school?
Yes, I'm sure she represents all of the people on welfare. Why not just eliminate the whole damn thing and let those in need fend for themselves. They are all faking it anyway.
Welfare is a social safety net that requires those receiving assistance to meet a certain set of criteria in order to qualify. They must prove that they have a need for the assistance before receiving it. Given the wide variety of situations people in need can find themselves in, following people in a grocery store parking lot and judging their need by the quality of the car they drive can't possibly tell you the whole story. If the criteria for receiving assistance precluded owning a Hyundai Santa Fe for example, then I think that you would have the right to judge them as cheats or frauds. But somehow, I seriously doubt that the car they happen to be driving at the time they go on welfare is written into the criteria for receiving assistance. If we impoverished everyone before we allowed them to receive assistance, wouldn't it be that much harder for them to climb out of that poverty in the long run thus increasing poverty overall? I'm sure that we would all probably miss the times we got to sit back and judge them but we could probably find someone else to judge without too much effort.
I don't my see my comments as being judgemental of the people but rather the program itself. There needs to be limits on the amount of time someone can receive welfare or it beocomes perpetual & multi-generational as we see time & time again. Do you see anything wrong with some of the stipulations I suggested?
Only that they already exist. Welfare reform passed in 1996 included: Ending welfare as an entitlement program. Requiring recipients to begin working after two years of receiving benefits. Placing a lifetime limit of five years on benefits paid by federal funds. Aiming to encourage two-parent families and discouraging out-of-wedlock births. Enhancing enforcement of child support. What did you think of my take on not impoverishing people before they are able to collect welfare?
