Welfare is a needed part of any government. Not all people will be self sustaining at all times and a little support while they're down helps everyone in the long run. Not to mention it's good to help out those who need it.
What I hate is welfare abuse. I hate the guy on "disability" because of a sore neck from an eight year old car accident. He can watch tv and play on his computer but he can't get a job in an office?
I hate the woman who has three kids and is pretty excited about No. 4 because it means more government aid. Rather than quit having kids, kids became her cash cow.
You get the idea.
But sometimes welfare is important.
Say you're a hard working joe who likes a cold beer and a hot woman at the end of the work day. You leave work and head to your favorite gentleman's club, have a beer, watch a dance and go home relaxed.
But oh nos! You just got laid off.
Well good thing in Colorado the ATM's dispense cash on your food stamp card. Trixie's finances are already hanging by a g-string and if you don't show for your lap dance, who will feed her kids?
The bare truth is if Trixie can't make enough money lap dancing, she'll have to go back to full time hooking and now the strip club is out a valued and talented employee.
Trixe's only hope at that point is to meet Richard Gere.
This is the nipple...eh, I mean ripple effect that could happen if Colorado lawmakers have their way and ban the use of government assistance at strip clubs.....
Something that believe it or not, is still technically legal.
Colorado Bill Bans Welfare Cards At Strip Clubs
Obviously I'm kidding. You should not use your food stamp money to see hot girls get naked.
Government aid shouldn't be allowed to be used for much more than keeping a roof, keeping it warm, keeping people fed and keeping them clean.
I know good folks who are on and have been on food stamps and I get it that occasionally they wish they could buy some wine or go out with that money. If everyone were as responsible as them, that could work. That just isn't the case.
Lots of states are starting to talk drug testing for receiving welfare. There are noble intentions behind these bills, but they are bad.
A drug addict made a choice at one point in their lives to do drugs, now they are an addict. If an addict is trying to get clean but relapses the day before their food stamp test, we're saying they should starve to death?
I disagree.
I'm not sure how we fix this because we don't want welfare to be used (anymore than it is) as a crutch for druggies that don't intend to change. We cannot support people indefinitely who refuse to support themselves.
But on the other hand if we tell druggies they can't have assistance even though they're poor, where will it end? Next it will be smokers get less assistance because we're afraid they'll use it to save money to buy cigarettes.
Then maybe fat people can't have as much in food stamps because they'll overeat and waste it.
I exaggerate a bit of course but you see my point.
The welfare system will likely be abused forever because people are lazy and we have an overly litigious culture.
So how do we fix it, I dunno. I just wanted to write that little satire bit about the strip club.
Your thoughts?
First off, I can't believe it's legal to use welfare money to pay for strippers. Just sayin'.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I've always hated the EBT card, because that's exactly the sort of thing that people use it for. You can use the EBT card in all sorts of locations, and depending on what sort of aid you receive, you can purchase things that aren't food and are not necessary to live, like TVs. Some EBT cards work like debit cards, and I disagree with that.
While I agree with the fact that it's nice to help people when they're down, the truth of the matter is that most people who get welfare or other government aid don't deserve it. (I want to point out here that I said MOST, not all.) The people that really need help can get it other places, like food pantries and homeless shelters where they DO help those in need but also make sure they're helping the people that can help themselves. I'm not sure about food pantries, but I know homeless shelters regularly check up on the people that go through and make sure they are looking for jobs and looking for homes and help them as much as necessary. There are also many non-profit organizations that help those in need find jobs and also provide professional clothes to interview in if they are not able to afford their own. So it is possible for people who actually need the help to get it without welfare.
That's my two cents.
Abbie,
ReplyDeleteI dunno if I would say most, but a good bit do abuse the system.
Thing is homeless shelters and food pantries and the like are mostly privately owned, not government run (which if there were enough charity to not need the government that would be awesome). But there are not enough of them and they lack the resources to help everyone that needs it.
Also, a lot of people that aren't that bad off don't need a homeless shelter. They have a apartment or something. But they need more than just food from a pantry.
They need clothes, school supplies, gas or bus fare etc. Without these things the cycle of poverty continues anyway.
That's why its a tough topic and I certainly don't have the answer.
The only reason this is a tough problem to solve is because the fence sitter wants to have his cake and eat it too. He realizes there is a problem with welfare abuse, but he doesn't really want to be "mean" about the whole situation by having to take a controversial stance.
ReplyDeleteLook, we only have three options in regard to government welfare. Either,
1)Revert to Social Darwinism
2)Leave the welfare system as it is
3)Increase the qualifications and restrictions
The first option is not only completely immoral, but holds no practical means, either. This is the richest country in the world. There is no reason why the government can't set aside some money to help feed and clothe its less fortunate citizens.
Obviously, the second option is the one we have the problem with.
The third option is our best choice. Limit the number of years a person can be on welfare in accordance to their situation. Scrutinize the reasons a person is applying for welfare more closely. Limit the establishments where welfare money can be used. Limit the items that welfare money can purchase.
If a mother on welfare keeps popping out more babies, limit the number of children covered. If a druggie wants food stamps offer him a deal. Offer the druggie free rehab, and as long as the druggie continues to attend these sessions and test negative, he can remain on food stamps (for a limited amount of time, of course).
"Next it will be smokers get less assistance because we're afraid they'll use it to save money to buy cigarettes.
Then maybe fat people can't have as much in food stamps because they'll overeat and waste it."
Tobacco is not a necessary commodity. Therefore, it should obviously be an item that cannot be purchased with welfare money. As for your second slippery-slope argument, well, it made me smile with amusement.
While I think it serves a greater good to offer social welfare, I don't think it is necessarily owed to anyone. Therefore, we should hold no qualms in placing reason-based stipulations on the acquirement of government aid.
There is an obvious difference between helping someone effected by situations beyond his control and helping someone who continuously makes poor or selfish decisions.
Why is it a given that Social Darwinism is immoral? There are certainly some who would say that social darwinism is a morality all it's own. Read your Ayn Rand, dude. All 10,000 pages of Atlas Shrugged...
ReplyDeleteAh I wasn't going to comment on this, but I'm here now anyway. I think everyone's opinions on welfare dramatically depend on their experiences with it. If most of the people you've encountered abuse it then your opinion will be less favorable, if you personally know people who have been on it then you understand why it's needed.
ReplyDeleteSince I've only known people personally on it, and I'm quite aware they needed it, and they used it to get other jobs, of course I think it's important. In fact one of my best friends has been governmentally assisted.
I've also worked a ton with the homeless and mostly all the time it's churches that offer them free meals and places to stay. So shout out to those local churches.
The sad thing about the poor though is even if you can find food and shelter what you're still missing is a support system most of the time. I could fall and crumble in my life but i still have my family and some really good friends who would help make sure I get back the frick up. My point is yes the necessities in life are the most important, but it's harder than you think to get anywhere with only that.
Plus I don't know how many of you have actually been on welfare yourselves, I find people like commenting on things when they haven't been in those shoes.
I've never been accused of murder but I still have an opinion on the criminal justice system since I could one day be involved and because my taxes pay for it.
ReplyDeleteSame with welfare. If just people on welfare had a say the system would balloon up even more.
I really don't feel like discussing the morality of Social Darwinism in an unrelated blog.
ReplyDeleteJohn, how about blogging about Social Darwinism? Or you could do it, Dungy.
Meh, I don't really care that much.
ReplyDeleteWait,
ReplyDeleteYou had nothing to say about the topic at hand. Instead, you felt inclined to ask about the moral nature of Social Darwinism. I offered you an open invitation to discuss the issue and all you have to say in response is, "I don't really care that much?" What was the point of even posting unless your intention was to be a fucking internet troll?