Welfare

Right, first let me clarify that I don"t disagree with the fact that welfare assist the elderly and disabled. Nor am I denying that single parents aren"t helped. What I"m opposed to is the way the system is set up. Let"s split it down the middle, shall we? Welfare can stay in place for those who are elderly, who can prove they"re disabled and those who are working but are unable to get by without a little extra assistance. But for those that are not working (rather it"s because they can"t find work or choose not to work is moot) let"s implement a better system, one where those receiving help "donate" their time, therefore those people are, in essence, "working" for their monthly welfare benefits. Proving a system is fair or unfair like asking a bottlenose dolphin to live in my bathtub. In other words, impossible. Any program or assistance system is going to have flaws. Whether welfare is helping isn"t in dispute, or not entirely. What I"m arguing is that the way its set up now is flawed and gives the applicants no incentive to gain freedom from its clutches. The system doesn"t demand you actually get a job only that you look for one. Employment availability might be thin but as I stated above, if a person is unable to obtain gainful employment then let them earn the benefits they are getting by volunteering at charities or other programs that could use a little "volunteer" time given to them. Welfare may be only 11% of what the government spends but 11% of a hundred billion is still 11 billion dollars. In 2011 the government gave $1.03 trillion to welfare programs. 11% of that is $114,400,000,000. Put that way 11% isn"t so small after all. Money shouldn"t go to churches, that"s correct and I apologize for saying different in my earlier argument. However, I will argue that at least a part of the money being spent on welfare (see above statement for just how much) would be better spent on our schools, our parks, our community programs, etc. Defense spending may be part of the problem but it is not the only issue at hand. You write "only 27 % of women on welfare were idle. " There are an estimated 12 million people on welfare and of those 80% are single women with children. 80% of 12 million is 9.6 million and 27% of that is 2,592,000. Why are only women mentioned? What about idle men or idle couples? Even without adding them, the number of people on the welfare is significant and growing every year. The increase in elderly each year and the number of soldiers who are declared disabled annually are on the rise, which means the numbers are also on the rise despite my opponent"s claim to the contrary. Unemployment has also accounts for a large portion of those receiving welfare. But as I"ve already addressed these issues above I won"t be repetitive and do so again here. Perhaps my statement that children of parents receiving welfare are encouraged to stay on welfare once they reach adulthood is an exaggeration but only to an extent. Studies have proven that children learn by example. They will learn from us, our good and our bad habits, traits and words. If the parent of a child does nothing to encourage that child to do more, to become more then he/she is less likely to strive for higher ground. This, of course doesn"t apply every to parent or to every child but it"s a fair statement to say that a child who witnesses his/her parent(s) doing nothing and yet earning a monthly income will more likely learn the same behavior. As I (and I do apologize for this) forgot to list my sources I am unsure how you can possibly state that the census I used double counts and so forth. I"m willing to concede that the numbers I previously stated may be slightly higher as the source I used at the time (I double checked after reading Pro"s argument) couldn"t be verified. A more reliable source puts the numbers of people on welfare around 4.1% of the population but that isn"t including those on unemployment and/or food stamps. As of July 2012 the American population was estimated to be around 953 million people. 4.1% of 953 million is 39,073,000. Let"s say that number"s a bit high and use Pro"s 1.1%. 1.1 percent of 953 million is still 10,483,000 people on welfare. Pretty high numbers either way. Okay, now that I"ve refuted Pro"s arguments to my arguments I"ll move on to doing the same to Pro. Contention 1: Welfare helps those who can"t work. My reply: As I"ve stated above I don"t argue that welfare can and does help the elderly and disabled but it"s a fact that it does not help all the elderly and disabled. Only those making less than the government"s ideal monthly income may obtain these services. As I am running short on time (I"m due somewhere shortly) I will offer up a personal example. My grandfather, who worked 2-3 jobs his entire life and who is now struggling to make the monthly bill receives too much in Social Security and is not eligible for so much as a single food stamp. His total monthly income for a single male in his 80"s is less than 1,200 and yet the system won"t help him. As I"ve said, the system is flawed (with or without the asked for proof) and needs a face lift. Contention 2: The problem isn"t that people are lazy; there just aren"t enough jobs to go around. My reply: I"ve also addressed this in my above statements. I"m not (and if I did I sincerely apologize) saying that the people on welfare are lazy. I know a number of people, one very close to me, who are working very hard and yet needs a little help. As for employment, please refer to my above statement regarding this issue so I am not boring and repetitive. Contention 3: People on welfare find it difficult to get jobs. My reply: Now here is my opinion on this - there isn"t a viable excuse on this planet or the next for someone not completing their education and dropping out. There is no such thing as "had to drop out. " I myself not only worked full time but attended high school (I was one of those drop outs that decided that a GED wasn"t good enough, I wanted my high school diploma so returned to school at the age of twenty-one) and cared for my one year old son. Doing anything less than your best is just an excuse and prove me different with studies, articles and more and I"ll still contend that no excuse is valid enough to quite school. Now, for the McDonald"s study - First, it was conducted 20 years ago. Second, you don"t mention why the 13 out 14 didn"t get the position at McDonald"s. Was it because they lacked experience or education. Were the applicants under 18 as you do mention that is the young who are having a harder time finding employment? (I"m asking as I was unable to locate the article you used as a source and by no means am I saying that the article doesn"t exist only that my search skills are (ha, ha) lacking) My conclusion: Keep a system that brought us out of 2 depressions? I"m only aware of one, though welfare in some form has been around since colonial times I believe it is during the Great Depression that the current welfare system, with some amendments, was first established. However, I could be wrong about that so please don"t think poorly of me if I am. And since this isn"t a history lesson I"ll move things along. I fail to see how updating and revamping a system that is in desperate need of it is cruel, rash and more stressful than that of what is already in place. I"m not saying there aren"t those who are in need only that the system as it is now isn"t working well. Abolishing the old and welcoming the new isn"t anything America should reject. Aren"t we the country where dreams can come true, where the hard working can improve their lives, where the brave can live free? I believe we are so let"s update how we view the poor and instead of pitying them, help them improve their lives and not by handing them money. As you get older and wiser you realize that when people are given anything without having to earn it (unless they are physically or mentally incapable of earning anything), they become ungrateful and lazy. They also become less happy. - Dennis Prager. Your greatest asset is your earning ability. Your greatest resource is your time. - Brian Tracy The second quote we could change up a little so it would read; America"s greatest asset is Her people and their potential earning ability. Our greatest resource is Her people"s time. Thank you and I look forward to your response. statisticbrain. com www. welfareinfo. org www. foxnews. com www1. salary. com www. ehow. com www. urban. org americanthinker. com www. census. gov apps. npr. org money. cnn. com singlemotherguide. com www. robinsoncurriculum. com goarticles. com/article/Do-Our-Children-Learn-By-Example