Welfare Millionaires
Just a few points, as I've caught a cold and am not in the mood to give this post the full treatment it deserves. One thing that bothers me is an argument espoused by right leaning indiviuals. They have a very valid point, but the implication is usually taken to the extreme, in my opinion. What I am referring to is the issue of welfare.
The argument goes something along these lines - welfare shouldn't exist because people abuse the system and able-bodied people have an incentive to not work. In a more extreme version, it's argued that women have babies to get more money for welfare. I don't doubt that there are a handful of women on welfare who thought it was a money making idea. But children are expensive (or so I hear). I doubt from a financial standpoint you'd actually come out ahead by having another kid - and that's not counting all the other costs (or benefits which may be the reason you had another child). So I'm ignoring the baby money making argument for now.
Again, I agree with the point and am in favor of trying to restrict these people from taking advantage of the system. Does it make sense to get rid of a system that helps so many because some people take advantage of it? Or does it make sense to try to modify the system so as to limit people taking advantage (bad word choice I know but I'm sick)?
The implication that bothers me is that these people (taking advantage of the system) are somehow living it up. The idea that there are welfare millionaires sitting in some swanky Manhattan eatery wearing monocles and lighting their cigars with $100 bills. OK, that's an exaggeration. But there does seem to be this feeling that welfare recipients are living comfortable - at the least they're putting something over us. Now, maybe I'm wrong. But I would guess that 99.9% of welfare recipients are living a much different life than mine. One where they have to watch every dollar. In fact, dare I say, they are living in poverty. I just think it's important to recognize what exactly their life is like before we all start feeling like they're pulling one over us.
Put yourself in someone else's shoes. Your options are to work 50 hours a week at minimum wage or not work and make the same amount of money. Sure, I don't believe I could accept the money without working. But I could understand why someone else might. It's the incentives we've placed into the system.
Unfortunately, I don't have the answer. Sure, there are a lot of people on welfare content to not work. To them I say, too bad. But it's difficult and costly to identify those people. I have ideas to change the system, from subsidizing based on numbers of hours and type of job - basically, create an economic incentive for those willing to work 40 hours. And I think built in should be some type of education system. Yet my point right now is not necessarily to solve such a complex issue. Rather, it's to bring up a point that maybe people overlooked. Not to get all sappy, but maybe if we thought about real people instead of generalized people we could make more progress as a country.
Tags and Links:
* welfare * millionaire * poverty * republican * democrat * conservative * liberal * politic
* Life is Crap * rant * opinion
The argument goes something along these lines - welfare shouldn't exist because people abuse the system and able-bodied people have an incentive to not work. In a more extreme version, it's argued that women have babies to get more money for welfare. I don't doubt that there are a handful of women on welfare who thought it was a money making idea. But children are expensive (or so I hear). I doubt from a financial standpoint you'd actually come out ahead by having another kid - and that's not counting all the other costs (or benefits which may be the reason you had another child). So I'm ignoring the baby money making argument for now.
Again, I agree with the point and am in favor of trying to restrict these people from taking advantage of the system. Does it make sense to get rid of a system that helps so many because some people take advantage of it? Or does it make sense to try to modify the system so as to limit people taking advantage (bad word choice I know but I'm sick)?
The implication that bothers me is that these people (taking advantage of the system) are somehow living it up. The idea that there are welfare millionaires sitting in some swanky Manhattan eatery wearing monocles and lighting their cigars with $100 bills. OK, that's an exaggeration. But there does seem to be this feeling that welfare recipients are living comfortable - at the least they're putting something over us. Now, maybe I'm wrong. But I would guess that 99.9% of welfare recipients are living a much different life than mine. One where they have to watch every dollar. In fact, dare I say, they are living in poverty. I just think it's important to recognize what exactly their life is like before we all start feeling like they're pulling one over us.
Put yourself in someone else's shoes. Your options are to work 50 hours a week at minimum wage or not work and make the same amount of money. Sure, I don't believe I could accept the money without working. But I could understand why someone else might. It's the incentives we've placed into the system.
Unfortunately, I don't have the answer. Sure, there are a lot of people on welfare content to not work. To them I say, too bad. But it's difficult and costly to identify those people. I have ideas to change the system, from subsidizing based on numbers of hours and type of job - basically, create an economic incentive for those willing to work 40 hours. And I think built in should be some type of education system. Yet my point right now is not necessarily to solve such a complex issue. Rather, it's to bring up a point that maybe people overlooked. Not to get all sappy, but maybe if we thought about real people instead of generalized people we could make more progress as a country.
Tags and Links:
* welfare * millionaire * poverty * republican * democrat * conservative * liberal * politic
* Life is Crap * rant * opinion
posted by Tom G at 4/03/2006
6 Comments:
I was denied for welfare because I was white. This is when I was a pregnant teen all alone. They told me that because I was white I should have more resources and family to help me than the average black person.
I paid my taxes and only needed it for half a month's rent.
Ended up going back to three jobs two weeks after having my first child and it was the Catholic church who paid half my rent. I paid them back. I will never forget the rude treatment I was given.
When I went back to my night temp job, the woman whose place I was taking was in the lobby on her cell phone, nails done and everything, telling her friend very loudly "shoot, I told them this job ain't even worth it. I get more from my baby's daddy child support and my welfare check. She drove off in a bmw.
It is etched in my memory.
Too bad to hear about that. In a roundabout way, that example illustrates my point. The system, as I believe it to be, should help people like in your situation. Sadly, it's become more likely to help the person you described. It should never be a life benefit; rather, it should help you out for a limited time you need. I just think the system needs extensive overhauling to deal with the current world - you shouldn't remove a good idea because it's being implemented badly.
I agree ( with not removing it)
I have two other friends who pay taxes out the ass and were laid off, same thing (short time frame, begged to pay it back, anything.
They DEFINATELY need a major overhaul. Starting from the ground up. The predjudice in there is unreal (reverse). That would be a start.
But I am sure everyone in politics is too busy coming up with useless resolutions like the one I posted on my site. (about the Boston Strangler being recognized as a man of honor). The guy did it to make a point...and succeeded. Congress does not listen.
when i was younger i needed some help i had just moved out of parents home and was makeing it (not realy) on a dishwashers paycheck after all my bills were payed i had about $12 left over for food clothing and entertainment for the month with no help from family or room mates i resorted to asking for food stamps i asked just for $100 it would have made a huge differance to me but was told "NO" the reason?? i was a foul penis barer was told if i was a woman OR got a woman pregnant they could probly help me out.. but all that is water under the bridge as for the woman stateing that why would anybody pop out kids to get welfare ill tell you if you have lowerd expectations in life if section eight housing is all you want and free cable and not to have to work you will do it i personaly was freinds with a guy who was one of 8 children all difrent dads whos mom was living this way she actualy discussed it was time to have another because one was moving out and she would lose this chunk of her meal ticket no this was years ago and things may be differant but just because it seems weird and silly to us people who have drive and pride in ourselfs dosnt mean it dosnt happen
This comment has been removed by the author.
I believe the majority of the people on gov. programs need them, or at least that's what my liberal heart has me believe. However, I have two pseudo-friends both on WIC, Medicaid, and Kid Care, yet have the money to spend on Amusement Park season passes, cable, Netflix, an expensive birthday party, and oh yeah, a cruise. People like that give the rest of those who need it a bad name. My opinion is, if you can pay for a cruise, you can buy your own damn formula.
Which is why I believe these recipients should have to sit down with a financial planner and get a "Financialoscopy" as a requirement to receiving benefits. Teach budgeting and money management skills, and hold people more accountable.
Post a Comment
<< Main