Do you favor or oppose making people work for the government in order to get welfare?

Assuming they are not disabled or too old. Shouldn't they earn their keep?Do you favor or oppose making people work for the government in order to get welfare?
Yes I am an advocate of working for welfare. Sometimes even the disabled can work, such as answering phones, etc. There are no free lunches out there.Do you favor or oppose making people work for the government in order to get welfare?
Yeah,,,, and drug test too.





But it will never happen, a pregnant mother with 3 kids cannot and will not work.





When a welfare mom works for the government, then the government is liable, and open for numerous law suits.





Limit welfare to one kid, for one year, then you take care of yourself.





There is no personal responsibility, or no consequences, for having illegitimate children.





The easier you make it to have illegitimate children, the more illegitimate children there will be.





(and putting day-care centers in high schools does not help)
Working for the government is not the same as earning their keep unless there is something useful for them to do. But the biggest problem with your idea is that most of the people on welfare are young children and their Mothers who care for them, so making the mothers work means that the government would have to provide daycare so it would cost more money.


However I think that many of them would welcome such a program. Siting at home caring for you children with no money to hire sitters and get away for a while is a depressing life, so the opportunity to go to a make work job while someone else take care of your children would make your life better.
Okay maybe you need to research before you ask a question. Many states require recipients to do a certain number of hours of activity to receive aid. Activity includes work, school, or other approved activity. Its not exactly working for the government but it is working for themselves. I am in favor of recipients needing to work or go to school to receive their money as long as the children are old enough like 6 months or 1 year.
You know, I'm a Conservative, but the facts about who gets welfare are still the facts. Single parents and their young children.





I still cannot think of anything more valuable that any parent can do than parent their children. (And if they're not parenting their children let's take the children away and sterilize the parents).





We need to focus on the causes of welfare (irresponsible sex), who is really being served, and ways to responsibly limit the number of children males and females can bring into this world on everyone else's dime.
Yes, I agree that they should be required to work the money off. At one time, my state required welfare recipients to work off their checks. They took the amount of the check and divided it by the minimum wage to determine how many hours the person(s) had to work. If that person failed to perform the work without good reason, they were denied for benefits for 90 days.





I don't know if we still have that program but welfare is no longer the issue that it once was. Many people have discovered that they can earn much more by being on SSI. I personally know of many people who have made this switch. One was approved for chronic fatigue syndrome. Two due to alcoholism and drug abuse. One gets it for schizophrenia (he researched the symptoms at the library). Two who get it for depression. One man that I knew stayed up all night before his interview and then fell asleep during the interview. He was approved for a sleeping sickness. One woman was trying to get it for her kids and herself for ADD but I haven't talked to her lately so I don't know if she was approved.





SSI gives these people much more money than welfare used to. They are still eligible for subsidized housing and food stamps. The medical costs a little but it's worth it. They still get help with their utilities. And now they don't need to worry about working or ever losing their benefits. If you look at the decline in the welfare rolls you will see a direct correlation to increasing numbers in the people who are now getting SSI. Oh yeah...one more reason they like it is because SSI does not require them to get any kind of treatment for these ';conditions';.
This is a common enough argument that I've heard over the years.


In fact it is the basis for the change that occurred thirteen years ago with wefare reform, they thought the would be saving reams of money.


It didn't work out that way.


Most of the welfare recipients are too young to work. If someone had office skills, they would be working, not collecting welfare. Why would they not? Not having a job, as anyone can tell you who has gone through it, is terribly damaging to your self respect, you feel like a failure, a loser. What they put you through to get on welfare is like killing your whole perception of yourself as a human being. Its not fun, a day in the park, easy, or worth it.


As the times get rougher more people will be finding this out, you really have to be on your last legs to get it, no assets over $1,200, and of course no bank accounts.


You have to be at the end, and if you have any skills at all, you will be out in the job market, not the welfare office.


The next thing is this, if your way worked and we somehow employed the remainder of the incapable whether its from drugs or alchohol or mental problems, what kind of employees would we be hiring? They would have to be kept on even as we cut back, leaving the good out and the bad in. Or we fire them? Doesn't that put them back on the rolls? Or do we just let them roam the streets?


Thats the one question I never seen answered.


What happens in this country, in this day, when we end welfare for the damaged, where do you think they will go, do, and worst of all, to whom will they do it?


One thing I can guarantee, they won't disappear.
I'm Liberal but still think that welfare recepients should do some type community service even if it is sweeping the sidewalks.





They should also get more vouchers for services like utilities like they switched to for food stamps so the money goes for needs and not sitting in a bar drinking and gambling.
NO! The entire communist welfare system should be eliminated. There is nothing in the Constitution of the United States that allows the federal government to confiscate and redistribute what working people earn. ';Earn';? What a concept!
Well, I oppose welfare in the first place.





If someone has kids, get together with other mothers with kids and one takes care of the kids and the rest work.





But if I have no choice about welfare (and I don't) yes, make them work for the gov't.
Agree. Whether it be work for government or anything else. Just do something! To get something for nothing is always a recipe for disaster(laziness).
If we're going to make them work for the government and collect welfare too, wouldn't it just make more sense to pay them a more decent wage for their government job and just have them not be on welfare
I don't think I want them doing anything important. They would surely screw it up. They should do something that would make them want to get off welfare. Picking up roadkill comes to mind.
Yes, or they should at least be enrolled in university or trade school. That is something we could all agree on. Does this also mean that parents will be paid enough to cover the cost of child care and still come out ahead?
Yes they should, anyone on welfare who is as capable of working as the rest of us should be forced to earn their own keep.
yes,work for money,do something positive,stay off of drugs and alcohol too
Workfare not welfare.


I like the idea
Work camps it is!
YES !!!! GET THEM TO WORK... AND STOP WIPING THEIR ***...
I'm not so sure I would favor that because then you would need a whole new 'program' to organize what jobs would be done and by who and how much pay should be earned so on and so forth and it would be controlled by the gov no doubt . I wouldn't like that.


I do agree 100% that the program should be regulated as far as YES on the drug testing. I have had to be drug tested for jobs before and I do not think that people who have been collecting welfare should be exempt from that. Also people who have basically made welfare their means of survival should be monitored closer, like why are they NOT getting a job after a while. I thought welfare was to help people get back on their feet not a way of 'making a living'





Look, I had to get help from welfare before. Our family had two small children at the time, I was home with them both and my husband worked. He fell from a roof and broke his leg really bad,compound fracture,had to get surgery and be on complete bed rest,had pins and rods ut in there. I was taking care of him and our two sons. I didn't work outside the home at this time and if I did get a job outside the home I would have paid more in child care than I could have made. My husband was basically bedridden for 6 months . We were a pay check to pay check kinda family if you know what I mean !


We got help.


I hated to do that but I would do whatever it took to take care of our family.


I hated every minute of it !! I would have to go down town and stand in the 'welfare line' and it sucked ! I don't see how anyone would want to make a living at it. The people treated you like ypur dirt. They were rude. It stunk in there. I found it quiet interesting how some people would come in there and stand in line with what looked to be about 5,000 dollars worth of gold around thier neck !!


lol !! Some people had five babies from ages 1-5 and one in the oven and they would have fur coats on and it appeared that they had no kleenex for their little ones' noses because they all snotty little noses !


We received help for about a year and I was soooo happy to be done with that system and I haven't ever had to use it again and pray to God I don't ever have to !!!!