Social program reform

[legacyofCangelosi]

Here it is a forum to discuss how certain programs should be reformed. I'll start by saying that I'm a proponent of cutting programs for the most part, but assuming this will never happen, how do you think these programs can be made to work and also to be more cost effective.

 

Earlier i posted....For example, not counting handicapped people, i believe people who are able to work, but do not, and are on welfare, should get stricter conditions in terms of job hunting. For example, the same money going into the program now should be used to help these same people find jobs. A major problem for example is the housing system. Where for example if a person has an income of 5,000 or less they get public housing (this is an example i dont remember the exact numerical figure), however, if they make more than this amount they cannot get public housing, but they also cannot afford to rent or buy another place to stay. So what happens, this person has no incentive to work harder or to look for a slightly better paying job, because the person ends up losing. Those are inherent problems that add to the problems of dependancy of govt help rather than pushing people to better themselves. So, do you guys think that welfare programs, rather than be handouts, should be in place as a rebound program for people who are out of luck for whatever reason, but the program will instead serve as a medium to help people find jobs. For example if the person has to prove to a supervisor of some sort that they have found a job or that they are seriously attempting to by showing letters resumes, application denial letters. The person should then have a time table set up for job hunting, in which a step by step process is used to assure that this person is actually trying to find work. Next they will loose the benfits if they fail after a period to provide for themselves in order to give them incentive to work, no work, no govt help. Once the person is back on their feet the govt can let them be. This can be done w/o raising taxes, simply by reallocating current funds. Of course the system has problems, but its better than now. does anyone else have a system they think may work or changes to this one or so forth. please discuss. I'll be more than happy to follow up.

[Lcyberlina]

A major problem for example is the housing system. Where for example if a person has an income of 5,000 or less they get public housing (this is an example i dont remember the exact numerical figure), however, if they make more than this amount they cannot get public housing, but they also cannot afford to rent or buy another place to stay. So what happens, this person has no incentive to work harder or to look for a slightly better paying job, because the person ends up losing

 

I think this program should have a time limit for people who don't have dissabilities and should not be dependant on income. Let's say we put a 3-5 year cap for housing help and instead of providing "free housing", provide these people with access to affordable housing. I would also recommend a purge of the current beneficiaries of the program. Some people that entered it through dissabilities are still receiving help, even if their dissability was a temporary one and they no longer are disabled. I think all persons with dissability claims should go through a rigorous medical examination in order to prevent false claims. Also, make regular medical check ups part of the program for people with dissabilities that may only be of temporary nature.

 

There is so much bureacracy in the system that there are many loopholes that invite inescrupulous people to take advantage of it.

 

For example if the person has to prove to a supervisor of some sort that they have found a job or that they are seriously attempting to by showing letters resumes, application denial letters. The person should then have a time table set up for job hunting, in which a step by step process is used to assure that this person is actually trying to find work. Next they will loose the benfits if they fail after a period to provide for themselves in order to give them incentive to work, no work, no govt help.

Agreed. For those who go on welfare and don't work in order to keep receiving the benefits, they should be given time limit for finding a job. Keep a record of job hunting and employment activities to avoid "repeated offenders". Those who constantly go on unemployment benefits should be marked and denied benefits on the basis that there was no intent to find employment.

 

The same should be done for the "food Stamp" program. Although, families with small children and or elderly should be given help regardless of their working status. This to avoid children malnutrition and sick elderly people.

[SorianoFanHFW]

Kill almost everything, that's my solution.

 

Get rid of unemployment, why should we reward anyone for not working? That's friggin' stupid. Get rid of medicare and social security too. Get rid of social and corporate welfare. Then we'll have so much money we can make our military 10 times bigger.

[Lcyberlina]

Kill almost everything, that's my solution.

 

Get rid of unemployment, why should we reward anyone for not working? That's friggin' stupid. Get rid of medicare and social security too. Get rid of social and corporate welfare. Then we'll have so much money we can make our military 10 times bigger.

Sorianofan... We're talking of a realistic approach.

 

And I think we shouldn't reward anyone for not working, but at least we should help them get back on their feet. However, this doesn't mean that it should be done indefinetely, like Legacy said, there should be a time limit.

 

We don't need our military to be bigger to fight terrorism... What good has it done to us in Iraq anyway.

 

What we need is a web of spies so highly advanced that "Minority Report" would be pale comparisson. :mischief

[Das Texan]

Kill almost everything, that's my solution.

 

Get rid of unemployment, why should we reward anyone for not working? That's friggin' stupid. Get rid of medicare and social security too. Get rid of social and corporate welfare. Then we'll have so much money we can make our military 10 times bigger.

kill federal education dollars also.

 

 

 

 

unless you are a rich mofo....you have had federal assistance of some sort getting you through college.

[legacyofCangelosi]

again lets put complete cuts aside for this post, obviously thats a good alternative. The issue of small children IMO is a problem, because obviously you dont want kids to be dying all over the place, but it is often the case where people are having too many children irresponsibly wihtout tinking of financial consequences, and then the govt continues giving them aid every time they get another child. This goes again my principles but how about placing regulations on aid and warning these people that they will not receive further aid if they continue having children. I would say take the kids away but then that opens up a can of worms, because our foster parent system is terrible and this could do more harm than good.

[Lcyberlina]

again lets put complete cuts aside for this post, obviously thats a good alternative. The issue of small children IMO is a problem, because obviously you dont want kids to be dying all over the place, but it is often the case where people are having too many children irresponsibly wihtout tinking of financial consequences, and then the govt continues giving them aid every time they get another child. This goes again my principles but how about placing regulations on aid and warning these people that they will not receive further aid if they continue having children. I would say take the kids away but then that opens up a can of worms, because our foster parent system is terrible and this could do more harm than good.

I agree with you. Some people go as far as to have children for the sole purpose of making deductions on their income taxes... This is no exaggeration.

 

But this should be a Social Work area. Someone should be in charge of verifying that families are educated on planned parenthood and discouraging them from having more children. For families to qualify for "food Stamp" and housing help they should meet some criteria, not only "salary" or "number of children". Honestly they should keep the "handout" flat and not increase it with the number of children. That would force them to seek a better paying job and not have any more children.