Welfare - Let's hear from the conservatives on this one
 

Ok, I hear over and over again from conservatives and republicans regarding taxes, and basing their reason for voting Republican on the fear that if they vote democrat, the democrat will raise taxes and give all the money to the unemployed.

Where do you (by you, I mean conservatives who believe this) get this opinion from/base it on? I mean, it was a democrat president that reformed welfare to what it is today, and it's pretty much a non-issue for both sides of this presidential campaign (and the last one). So I'm very curious as to why this bias persists.

Well the fact is that today their is somewhat of a deadlock in political discourse.

Republicans traditionally favor 'smaller' government, meaning a rollback in entitlements (social security, medicare, welfare, et cetera) and other programs which they feel are wasteful. However, they are paralyzed by the fact that these programs are immensely popular and that speaking against them would not be in their political interests. But to offset this, they speak of lowering taxes.

Democrats are seen as 'big spenders' and this has generally been borne out by reality. But, while the programs they champion are popular, the method which is used to pay for them, raising taxes, is usually a non-starter. You see the dilemma. Both parties are locked in an endless dance to convince the electorate that it can have have its cake and eat it too.

The system works best when the executive is controlled by one party and the Congress by another - as in your Clinton example.

The bias that exists, then, is one largely sustained by rhetoric; both sides today are too entrenched to advocate systemic change regarding these issues.

Yes, if I were rich I would be concerned that a small portion of the money I made off of exploiting cheap laborers might be used to raise their standard of living to something decent. It's MY MONEY DAMN IT.

Except by and large those people who are on welfare are lazy bastards who just don't feel like working. Get a job, lazy asses!

It's really only the libertarians that are against welfare. (Not that that's a bad thing).

I assume you have facts to back up this claim, such as Fox News poll "Are You A Lazy Ass."

Go 10 minutes outside of Washington D.C. and behold, those who have been championed by the democrats. Then try to get good service at McDonalds. It is always fun since you never know what your gonna get or how it will be configured.

Ya Phaenx, my mom who is disabled doesn't deserve any money from the government. She's a "lazy ass" because of her umpteen physical/mental ailments. Even though she can't really function without taking large amounts of pills EVERYDAY, she should still work her ass off to be just as good as the rest of us. She would work if she were able to, but she can't anymore, so no, she doesn't deserve any money because she's a "lazy ass".

There are lots of people that do not deserve it. I don't think that the programs should be taken away, but I think that they should be refined.

Hey hey don't bother arguing with Phaenx all his sayings have been the same and he won't change em because he's pure 100% republican though that party itself has turned drastically away from what it used to be just 13 years ago. :rolleyes: (thats for the kansas statement)

C'mon, you're just mad everything I say is the written infallible word. Someone once told me that I can't be right about everything, but yet here I am, right about everything.
:D

Some people really need the help, and some are lazy asses who wont do shit for themselves because they government will pay for them to live, and they just keep having kids because they get more money that way. I once personally met this redneck bitch who had 6 kids and hadnt worked in a long time because "why should I work if the govt will pay for everything I need". She thought it was hilarious, though I on the otherhand wanted to kick her in the throat.

This is why most conservatives are against welfare.

I'm very conservative, but I wouldn't mind taking the money in welfare and putting it all into a national health care program. That way it's put into something useful for everyone, not to some lazy ass who does nothing, is a poor parent, and keeps having kids. And I've seen a lot of those types here in Wisconsin, so don't say it never happens.

I too have seen a lot of the welfare folk that basically qualify as bastard factories.

I've seen a lot of worthless people that have jobs.

The argument against your underlying point isn't that there are no lazy people receiving welfare--it's that the amount of money they leech from the government is miniscule in relation to corporate leeches.

Since I suspect the average hard-working US citizen would be outraged if they knew the extent of where our public money actually gets squandered, the conservative party doesn't address those types of issues in public forums. Instead, they redirect the popular anger at an unpopular group--the poor--through a series of ideologies and institutions that perpetuate the cultural belief that poor people are in their social position due to a moral deficiency, that they have a worse work ethic than "us", and that they don't deserve or even desire better opportunities and commodities.

I stayed at a house full of white trash last night. There are A LOT of people that do absolutly nothing to try to get back on their feet. I have seen how bad a family can get when they're given things like welfare. I've seen time and time again families just like that blow opportunity after opportunity. This part isn't an arguement or speculation, this is a straight-up, no-bullshit, 100% first hand observation.

That is why I'd rather put that money into a public health care system. Not only does it take care of a critical need of families in need, it also fills the need of everyone.

Putting all the political rhetoric aside the underlying idea behind welfare is the eliminate poverty. Poor/poverty is a relative term. The government draws some arbitrary line in the sand and says that if you're on one side then you're poor. The sad thing is that by simply moving a person to the other side of the line doesn't keep them from being poor. They still are poor in comparison to those who have more. In order for welfare to be a success it would have to eliminate both the rich and the poor. Sounds like socialism to me.

Oh,and before you lefties dismiss me as crazy, think about this: the standard of living of the "poor" in the US is many times greater than the kings of the 15th century. (running water, indoor plumbing, etc.) I have a secret for you-there will always be poor people. Stop telling them they deserve more because entightlement programs kill the little bit of pride/drive that the lower class has.

Fallon sorry about you're mom. That suxors. Sit down some time and figure out how much it cost to keep her comfortable (alive) and then objectively decide if one human life is worth that much. Why should your mother be worth more just because she's sick. All the money in the world won't keep her from dying eventually.

One more thing-I mean no offense. And I'm not a republican.

LSD

Watch the end of Scarbourough Country on MSNBC. He highlights government spending that is insanely useless and is often $500,000 to millions. Programs like that are what people should be offended about.

No, I'm not going to sit down and do that, she's not handicapped to the extent she's not capable of living. She can do that, but she can't do much else. She has almost daily doctor visits.

With your logic 123dsa, we should let you die too. We all die eventually. She enjoys her life as much as she can even through the pain she goes through phyiscally and mentally. It hurts her to have to be on government aid because she never liked accepting aid, but she has to do it anyway.

I think the issue is not those who are sick and "need" assistance,
but those who abuse the hell out of the system.

Get every single welfare recieptiant in the welfare office and have a doctor look them over, if you are able bodied no soup for you.

There has to be a point where the system says no more.

Then you have people fucking themselves up on purpose.

Fallon-I'm glad you're seeing the light. Try looking at the problem from the outside. The fact that she is your mother changes your view. I don't really think it's plausible to put a dollar value on life, but I think we spend entirely too much government money (read my money) on postponing the inevitable.

Health services should be available to those who can afford them. It is only logical. I want a new car. I currently do not have the money for the car I want, hence I do not have the car. Quality of life issue are bullshit. If you can afford it great, if not, you don't deserve it.

***Please note that I am saying that nobody deserves or is owed medicine/luxuries, entightlement is crap. If you can buy it great***

If someone wants to go to this extreme to get the hand out, so be it.

Hell being the venture capitalist that I am I will open an Ill fuck up up enough shop so you can stay on welfare. Ill be rich$$$$ Then I can pay more tax to help those that I helped disable.

Ahhhh, the cycle of life.

There are cases where that's allready happening, and a good deal of people are committing fraud by getting doctors to say that they are indeed unable to work. I have no problem at all with helping poor people, if I had it my way, everyone would be rich and the whole thing would be solved and everyone would be happy. Now that my idealistic side has had a chance to do a little frolicking, back to reality. We can't do away with welfare, it is too popular, but we can reform it to make it better. By making sure that people aren't committing any kind of fraud, whether it be by personally inflicting wounds upon themselves or getting doctors to say they are disabled, and other stuff like that. I'm not so sure about a National Health Care Plan, because I've seen what it does in England and it basically cancels out any competition and leaves only one choice, which is the Government's Health Care, which moves slower than molasses. Now I have no clue about any of the details for our NHCP, if it left competition out there to give a better product to the consumers, then sure, I might be onboard for that bill, and it gave the help to those who really needed it and can't afford the more expensive, but quality health care offered by HMOs (another thing that needs reform, but that's another story). This is like one of the few issues that I'm not so gung-ho totally Republican about, I may be conservative about it, but I'm not going to turn a blind eye to people that really do need the help and just write them all off as lazy asses who won't get a job.

Republican, Democrat, both parties are guilty of milking us. Both parites want your money, want to spend it on "Their" programs, so dont think that one or the other is the right party, thye both want "Your" money!!!

The "right" "program" is the one Republicans support. The military! I personally would like to have a few more bombs rather then a bunch of bums trading their food stamps for booze.

And I'd rather have a few more bucks for my mom to get food for us, then a couple more bombs.

See the difference is for some people, everyone matters, for other's, only "I" matter.

The military already costs more than welfare, if anything, boosting them would only make taxes go up now (not that they need anymore boosting at this point).

As for welfare.. reform is defenitely needed. Theres a lot of people abusing the system - thats something everyone can agree upon. There are people out there who truly need it to make ends meet while they take on multiple jobs just to feed the kids and pay the rent. They deserve it. Then there are those who sit at home and wait for the check. They don't.

And by your logic 123dsa, then all of us should be dead because its "inevitable."

And what if you were crippled? Are you going to put a gun to your head and say that its inevitable? Or maybe one of your loved ones.

Just because it hasn't happened to you doesn't mean that others should suffer because you felt that extra dollar wasn't going to make someone else happier.

archer2371. Canada is supposed to have a really good public health care system. And overall ours can be better than any other countries as long as we take the time and spend the money.

And the military will always cost a lot because the number one expense for the military is troops.

time to go for cheap mass produced robots time :D

imagine if we didn't have to pay all those troops and had much cheaper ways to fight...

as for health care - i agree that the U.S. health care system could be boosted greatly - ever been to some European countries? its pretty amazing how different / improved it is


but i'd say the reason the U.S. really won't be going anywhere is simple - its too stubborn

people will always say "well they did it in the past so i'll keep it this way" - too stubborn and so we will always have the same feelings / style of living

When did I mention Canada?

I think that the national government should only do what can't be done locally, since the money didn't exist till I earned it, it is mine, but I need the government, so it should try to do as much as possible with as little possible of my money. Welfare doesn't strike me as being very necessary.

archer, just trying to point out it can be done very effectively.

Oh yeah, I agree, it can be done effectively, it just has to be done a certain way to be effective. I.E. (and no offense meant to the English at all) not like England's Health Care.

Then again, Welfare also illustrates a lot about how bad politicians are. They try to please everyone and do everything instead of doing a small list of the absolute essetials and do them very well. Instead if there's a problem somewhere, they just throw money at it and assume it's solved. If it isn't solved the first time, they throw more money and again think it should be solved.

Zeld-
I DO have close family members that are sick/dying. I still reject the idea that any human life is worth the amount of money spent through welfare/medicare/medicaid. Why do the poor "deserve" something for free that the more productive pay for themselves? That question is at the heart of the issue for me. I personally can't understand what sort of miserable lives people live who care more about making others happy than themselves. Self-depreciation is not a virtue.

LSD

BTW I don't care if my tax dollars are going to make somebody else happier Zeld. Neither do I expect others to care if their taxes make me happier. I know what's best for me. Don't expect me to care if others choose a course of poverty that I myself do not choose.

The EU is the perfect example of the illogical interest in the well-being of others. Inidvidual countries forfeit the right to make fiscal/monetary decisions based upon what's best for the group. Soon they'll all be paid the same... Socialism is nothing to admire. I prefer a more individualist/objectivist view.

LSD

Self-depreciation is not a virtue.

Tell that to Mother Teresa. I guess Greed is the virtue of the modern age.

Canada post - Canada has been able to separate the Wellfare cases from Healthcare cases a little better than some. however we do still have a huge amount of abuse of the system that has to change. And for "smooth" who mentioned it's a small amount being leeched.... a leech is a leech... may not be taking one but do you want one attached to your groin ? Do not confuse those who are handicapped with those who are EXPECTING a Handout.

Well, I actually stated that they were "relatively" small as compared to corporate leeches. But my point holds and has been substantiated in numerous journals and research--if you want to "fix" the problem go after the people causing the most damage first.

I'm not going to belabor the point with people uneducated on the subject--I would rather focus my time on my students; if anyone wants to research my point further search for "wealthfare."

edit:
Oh shit, it's not in my nature to let people wallow in their ignorance:

http://webarchive.afsc.org/jfa/subs3.GIF

http://webarchive.afsc.org/jfa/wealthfa.GIF

I agree Smooth, I have never been on welfare before so I definately qualify as uneducated in that area. I bow before your experience and education.
Hmm, anyone have some salt? I think there a leech on my....

Giving money to the poor for no other reason then they're "poor" makes their survival too dependent on the government and also the whimes of the government. This creates a socialist system and gives the federal government way too much control of the people. The bill of rights means nothing if the government can contol your life simply by decreasing your monthly check if you're not doing what THEY want.

The government needs to reel in the businesses who send jobs overseas. Tell them, " If you lose American jobs overseas, you need to pitch in more money to help out the people you just screwed." Maybe this would stop the plant closings that have been increasing the number of poor.

So Smooth what your charts show is that the US government would rather pay corporations to stay in America, and keep people who want to work working and pay more taxes than giving money to most people who like the hand out?

This is ok in my book.

Actually reconmike, those corporate giveaways don't even attempt to reward corporations for employing US citizens. If that were the case, I would be supportive of at least some of them.

One could (and many people do) argue that tax subsidies to coporations and wealthy individuals automatically results in domestic job stability and creation. If that were the driving force, however, such subsidies would hinge on corporations actually expanding domestically--but they don't.

It would be a simple process to state, for example and by no means exhaustive, that for every job or business created domestically, X amount of tax credit accrues. That isn't what is going on. Instead we say, here's X amount of money--do what you want with it (and I don't have a problem with people doing what they want with their money, but this is tax money--our money) and we hope you create a job with it. There isn't anything preventing that same corporation from using our tax money to create a tech service in India, relocate the production from here to there, provide the service to US citizens, and reap the profit (tax free now, of course).

From that perspective we seem to be doing everything bass-ackward. We give exhorbitant amounts of money to the rich, hope they will create domestic jobs, bitch when they relocate abroad, and complain about the lazy people on the "dole" who were kicked to the streets when their corporation left stateside.

Lets break this down to the basics. The Federal Government is not supposed to be there to aid in every human ailment. Until recently, none of theses programs that are now a part of our fabric did not exist. Your mom is sick, the family pulled together and cared for her. How is it the Federal Government responsibility to care for your mom? WE have created a whole generation dependent on the Fed's. I personally know people who don't work because the benifits and incoming cash is better on social services. The more children you have the better. So now it's the taxpayers responsibility to feed those children. It never ends. Go to work Sucker... we need a tax base to pay for all the services.

smooth, tax breaks go to TAXPAYERS. All the others are entitlement programs.

I don't know why people keep coming here to say the same things:

I think EVERYONE agrees that the idiots who abuse the system are the reason why its broken.

But i think everyone also agrees there are those who deserve the aid because they are being productive.

The problem is, the entire system of paying and not to mention the theory of trickle-down has been proven in history time and time again that it doens't fix the issues. The system(s) are broke and need reform.

I don't think anyone deserves welfare. Being productive should in the end earn you money.

You're paying people to sit on their ass and do nothing. A certain amount will make it on their own because that's their attitude. Another amount will do absolutely nothing because they're getting a paycheck for doing nothing.

The system doesn't need reform, the system needs to be nixed.

as jimmy4 said, nobody deserves welfare. nobody deserves one penny they didn't earn by working, including corporations. wealthfare, welfare, both programs are a different version of the same disease.

The health care system in Canada...its funny seeing Canadians brag about their free health care which is payed through taxes. I'm glad we don't use their system; since I am successful I should be able to see a better doctor than the average person.

I think you should do more research on the Canadian socialized health care system before you make such remarks. Canadians are well aware that they pay for the health care safety net through higher taxes. Believe it or not, the vast majority of Canadians want this. Congratulations on being successful; most people aren't. So I'd say your opinion is vastly unpopular.

It's not a perfect system. Some wealthy people go so far as to cross the border to receive care. But they can afford the luxury.

And the bottom line is, when these sick people you don't care about have to go to the emergency room, you end up picking it up in taxes anyway.

Being productive doesn't mean you make money. Thats why workers in the past could work 14 hours a day for 7 days a week and still not make enough.

The fact is, people have to take shit jobs in society to make society work. They're going to be exploited and fucked with whether or not they are honest normal citizens.

IMO though, its an investment - if they can do it well enough so their next generation jumps up the social ladder, its a success.

On the other hand.. there are those who would rather sit at home and watch TV all day and screw their own children up.

Oh and for that one, being productive will not always make ends meet - if they don't deserve a penny for being productive then you might as well take their low salaries away sire!