Pat's Thoughts Volume 4: Welfare and Drug Connection in the US

Ah, welfare. For some, it's a way of a living. For others, it's a way of taking advantage of something. The questions are these: Who really needs to be on welfare? Who shouldn't be on it?

This is what I think should happen for those who want welfare. I think that if you have a single mother or father without a job, they need to be on it. I think that if you have a male or female on their own, with or without a child, and the male or female have a job, but just can't do good with what they're making, they need to receive it.

What pisses me off is when we have drug traffic in the US heavily increasing, and welfare is being cut. If we cannot eliminate these dealers, then it's a lose-lose situation. Most people who sell drugs do so because it's their way of living. They were brought up to believe that it was a normal job.

Furthurmore, in this lose-lose situation, does anyone think that some of the dealers may stop the dealing if they received a decent amount of money on welfare? I think that some would. Would ALL? No. Would some take advantage of the situation and continue to cash in on the welfare and sell the drugs? Yes. In this lose-lose situation, wouldn't it be better to eliminate some of the drug problems? What do you think?

The war on drugs is obviously growing in the US. Kids know that, but I'm not sure that adults realize just how easy it is to get drugs today, even for people who live in some of the nicest places in America. Drug prices are down and kids are now moving on from "smokin' a blunt" every now and then. Ecstasy, heroin, and cocaine are now easier to get and cheaper then ever. I personally stay away from drugs, but the people you least suspect are the ones on it. The preps and the jocks now do drugs just as much as the losers do. -Pat

I'm not sure if you realize this, but your average JoeShmo taxpayer pays for welfare. Raising it (and it's only gone down) is not logical. It makes people lazy and makes the lazy...uh, more lazy. Sure, there's those people who just got the bad end of the stick, but aren't those the type that are off before Sam says enoughs enough.

Do you believe a role of the government should be to give out money to those unfortunate? Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. That pursuit is a key word.

The war on drugs is purdy messed up as well. Might it be better to make them legal and tax the hell out of them...

Depends on the drug though.

[/insert_standard_republican_answer_here]

Do your next thought thing on Afirmative Action. I could go on and on about that.

People that argue about sports always use records and statistics. Yet, people that argue about welfare rarely know any statistics about it. I actually know someone that worked for the state and monitored welfare fraud and taught me a lot. It is very ironic that during the Clinton years welfare shrank, while it rose during the 70s and 80s.

Research questions:

How much money per week or per month do people on welfare get?

How long can someone be on welfare before they get kicked off?

What are the criteria for getting welfare?

What is total spending on welfare?

What percentage of the budget goes to welfare?

Man, your full of thoughts this week Patrick! :p

If everyone who "can't do good" or wasn't quite making enough could go on welfare, everyone would. What's doing good? Wouldn't we all want a little more?? It's way to easy to go on welfare IMHO, and the system is very much abused, by spongers who don't want to work, people who claim permanent physical injury they don't have and all kinds of schemes to get out of work. It is sad for those that really do need the assistance.

Personally, I do not buy the idea that certain groups of minorities/immigrants, or whoever will do jobs that others won't do. I was a single parent for a number of years, and was fortunate to have a fairly "decent" job, and fortunate to have an ex who was good at paying child support. That measley $300 per month literally put food on the table, as I tried my hand at very creative financing, budgeting practically to the penny, never/seldom having any extras as my entire check went to pay bills, house etc. Now, hadn't I been getting that measley $300 per month for food, you can bet your ass I'd get a second job (or third if necessary)and "Would" clean toilets if necessary and do whatever it took to feed my children.

Welfare simply wasn't an option for me, and even if it was, I would have never qualified for it because I had a job and made "too" much money ha ha..what a joke. Even if it were possible, it would be solely a very last resort. I know pride has much to do with it, and only if I couldn't feed my children would I have tried for it.
Much of my beliefs/feelings I suppose stem from my upbringing with a father who worked sometimes 15 hours a day to provide and would never dream of asking anyone for any help, as long as he was capable of providing.

As far as selling drugs go, I realize that some were raised with parents dealing drugs and thus fall into the life, but whether or not it's what they have been exposed to or brought up with, it's "illegal" and they know that. I don't see where selling drugs and welfare are related. I think it's probably an excuse, but not a good one IMHO.

TIS

• Welfare makes up a tiny percentage of your tax dollar...so little that it you wouldnt notice it if it was gone food programs and such (programs to go to the poor directly) make up less than 6% of the federal budget.
• Most of the nation's total government benefits go to middle class and wealthy recipients, with only 14% of total government benefits going to the poor. Cash Assistance payments account for just over 1% of all federal benefits programs.
• A prevalent welfare myth is that women who received AFDC became permanently dependent on public assistance. Analyses indicate that 56 percent of AFDC support ended within 12 months, 70 percent within 24 months, and almost 85 percent within 4 years.
• The average taxpayer pays $400 yearly on social welfare and $1,400 for corporate welfare.
• Social care is a bare minimum, not something a normal person would want to live off. Recipients live considerably below the poverty threshold.
• It is really easy to extoll the virtues of personal accountability when you focus on adults, but the majority of poor people in this country are children. Poor children really have no control over their predicament.
• The UN Human Index regards the Scandinavian countries as the best place on earth to live, with a high GDP, low unemployment, high-quality public services available to everyone, very low crime rate, etc. These countries are built upon the concept of a mix of free markets and a tight safety net.

I would also state that all welfare programs need automatic periodic review and analysis to ensure that the program is effective, efficient and combined with training and educational resources to get people back on their feet.

The problem is that folks are useing the term welfare to cover everything. SSI, disability and every other kind of system where people seem to be getting a check each month and not doing a dam thing to make life better for themselves or for the system giving them surport.

It boils people to see and or hear about folks who get free money and often you hear them brag about what they get and what they do with their money, while the rest of the people struggle and go to work each day.

It all boils down to that age old theory. When there is a problem, run to the goverment and let them fix it, pay for it or blamed them for it.

Thank you for your very informative post, Saladbar. Many people think that the problem with welefare is the cheaters. Why should they work? They are wrong in doing this, but who can blame them? Most of job that they qualify for are min. wage jobs making less than their welefare benefits.

The wrong people get denied.

I have a ratty 90 Sunbird Convertible, holes in my clothes, and a "baby's daddy" that I've seen maybe once in two years, and I tried to get help with food.

DENIED.

But the folks with new clothes and Cadillacs get the things they want.

The people who take advantage get it. The ones who need it are denied.

Helloooooo... maybe because they should be working to earn their way in life. Hey, you have to start at the bottom somewhere.
I think a good idea would be supplementation would be better. Make $7.00 at BugerKing and the goverment will give you $3.00 an hour to get you thru. Not sit on your ass and get a check. Maybe just maybe you get to be sift manager or then store manager, Ect.

How about working at nursing homes with the old folks or child care centers or even helpping in county parks or lakes. Give something back to the county that gives you help. At least the people who pay taxes would get something back for their dollars.

I know DK is right. Many do stay on welfare because it pays more than min. wage job, however that still does not make it right.

I also agree with you FS, and the idea of a supplemental income is good, but there must be a limit. It should be of assistance while one gets "on their feet" only, not a way of life. Many lose all incentive to even try when it's given to them. Let's face it, you have to work and earn money, not to mention get some kind of schooling, (if they want to make a little better than average money) in some specialized area these days. It does take a willingness and desire to want to succeed though. Assistance for only the "needy" for a few years until they are able to do this is a good idea.

Yet, I feel for Patches, who seems to be getting the butt end of the deal. Patches, I never understood why more effort couldn't be given to "make" these deadbeat fathers pay their fair share. Like I mentioned above, I was fortunate not to have that problem, but am well aware that a good many women do not get any help from deadbeat dads. If they cracked down on them, that would definitely ease the welfare system a great deal, don't you think?

TIS

I agree with you 100%. If he would help me out just a bit I wouldn't have to worry about things like that.

This is from my Barry Goldwater biography:

"If Barry Goldwater had been president, we would not have launched a multi-trillion-dollar experiment in welfarism that “not only failed to end poverty, hunger, homelessness, and assorted ills of the modern world, but opened a Pandora’s Box of other ills- drugs, broken families, illegitimacy, crime and more".