Quote:
Originally Posted by theking
People get welfare to house...feed...cloth and care for their children. Are you willing to watch the children suffer and die?
|
Welfare was meant to help people, not support and raise entire families. It's pretty simple - if you hand someone an opportunity to make "$X" for the rest of their life, most people will take it. And they take welfare, Section 8 housing, and other benefits, and they live off of it. They never have to work a day; They might not live well but they don't have to work - Ever.
I have a friend of mine in a similar position. Former US Army, has water on the brain, is considered 100% disabled by the US Army and the state of California. Between the two he makes $4k a month - plenty for a single forty year old man to live off of. When his medical condition affects him, it completely disables him - He can't walk - and this goes on for months at a time. But his medical condition hasn't affected him in the past ten years. Let me re-phrase that - HIS MEDICAL CONDITION HASN'T AFFECTED HIM IN TEN YEARS YET HE COLLECTS $4K A MONTH IN BENEFITS. Why should he get a job when he makes $50k a year being "disabled"?
Do I want to see kids suffer? No, of course not. But why are my tax dollars going to raise entire families of welfare babies? If parents can't care for their children, they get cared for by the state.
But why stop here? My father died in Vietnam in 1969 when I was nine months old. My mother got the usual benefits from the military. But she also got payments from Social Security for having a deceased spouse, and I too, as a child, got benefits until I was eighteen. My mother re-married, and we were rather wealthy growing up with my step father. Between my mother and I we collected $2k a month. That's $25k a year in benefits you paid for with your tax dollars. Social Security for a deceased spouse is a wonderful idea, but should be dropped after a certain threshold - Once a family is making hundreds of thousands a year, these benefits should stop.