Welfare

[Teacher Mark 53]

I'm organizing my first debate and I've chose welfare as the topic. The question is very simple: "Should the Government provide financial assistance to the poor?" "Why or why not?" I'd like to hear what you think.

[Heracles 417]

Of course they should.

[Teacher Mark 53]

Of course they should.

I'll give you a D+ just for showing up.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Of course they shouldn't. Hand outs sound good when people are down and out for sure but look at the other side. Oftentimes people become down and out because of their own irresponisble behavior. If there were no hand outs to begin with then people would be more apt to take stock in their behaviors and act accordingly. If the penalty was no one will be there for when they screw up then they will use the adage, "save for a rainy day" and think more about if their actions would be negative. If there was a handout always then that thinking will be more skewed toward, "this is probably going to hurt me but what the hell I have the government to fall back on."

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

"if you want more of something, subsidize it, if you want less, tax it"

[Heracles 417]

Of course they shouldn't. Hand outs sound good when people are down and out for sure but look at the other side. Oftentimes people become down and out because of their own irresponisble behavior. If there were no hand outs to begin with then people would be more apt to take stock in their behaviors and act accordingly. If the penalty was no one will be there for when they screw up then they will use the adage, "save for a rainy day" and think more about if their actions would be negative. If there was a handout always then that thinking will be more skewed toward, "this is probably going to hurt me but what the hell I have the government to fall back on."

Ah like the 6,000,000 who lost their job so far hey.

[Dan J 277]

Of course they shouldn't. Hand outs sound good when people are down and out for sure but look at the other side. Oftentimes people become down and out because of their own irresponisble behavior. If there were no hand outs to begin with then people would be more apt to take stock in their behaviors and act accordingly. If the penalty was no one will be there for when they screw up then they will use the adage, "save for a rainy day" and think more about if their actions would be negative. If there was a handout always then that thinking will be more skewed toward, "this is probably going to hurt me but what the hell I have the government to fall back on."

Even if everyone is responsible, and determined to work, there will never be jobs for everyone.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Of course they shouldn't. Hand outs sound good when people are down and out for sure but look at the other side. Oftentimes people become down and out because of their own irresponisble behavior. If there were no hand outs to begin with then people would be more apt to take stock in their behaviors and act accordingly. If the penalty was no one will be there for when they screw up then they will use the adage, "save for a rainy day" and think more about if their actions would be negative. If there was a handout always then that thinking will be more skewed toward, "this is probably going to hurt me but what the hell I have the government to fall back on."

Even if everyone is responsible, and determined to work, there will never be jobs for everyone.

If you were responsible and determined you would be working. Right?

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

To the op question. If you knew there was nothing to fall back on, would you take a mortgage on that you couldnt afford? Would you do your best at whatever job you had? Would you save money, instead of charging shite on a credit card?

All welfare recipients should be drug tested, just like I was when I was hired. Also they should have to do community time and pay it back!

It should be similar to a loan.

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

Natural selection, Stop feeding the freeloaders and they will die off leaving a stronger citizenship. Long live Sparta Not a good question when 300 is on rerun mode.

[Autumnchik 6]

IMO, yes, there should be welfare, but it needs to change from the current system. Yes, there are people who take advantage of the system, but there are also many people who truly want to work and not accept welfare, but the system is such that it is difficult to come off of it. Recently, I have had a couple of clients who would like to work. However, without an education, they can only find low paying jobs and, with the cost of daycare (daycare assistance is on a waiting list right now), they would actually make less than what it takes for daycare. So, they stay home with their kids instead. I say recently, because these particular clients are fresh in my head, but actually, thinking back, I've seen this scenario in several states over the past 11 years. I think education and career training needs to be an essential and mandatory part of a welfare program, not the half azzed component it is now.

[Dan J 277]

Of course they shouldn't. Hand outs sound good when people are down and out for sure but look at the other side. Oftentimes people become down and out because of their own irresponisble behavior. If there were no hand outs to begin with then people would be more apt to take stock in their behaviors and act accordingly. If the penalty was no one will be there for when they screw up then they will use the adage, "save for a rainy day" and think more about if their actions would be negative. If there was a handout always then that thinking will be more skewed toward, "this is probably going to hurt me but what the hell I have the government to fall back on."

Even if everyone is responsible, and determined to work, there will never be jobs for everyone.

If you were responsible and determined you would be working. Right?

Thats not the point. If we took laziness out of the equation. There is still no way every can be employed and make a living where they would be free of government assistance. Part of it is just due supply and demand across different occupations. But part of it is due to the nature of a capitalist economic systems. If you make less than everyone else, you will be poor no matter how much you make.

[luckytxn 2,265]

IMO, yes, there should be welfare, but it needs to change from the current system. Yes, there are people who take advantage of the system, but there are also many people who truly want to work and not accept welfare, but the system is such that it is difficult to come off of it. Recently, I have had a couple of clients who would like to work. However, without an education, they can only find low paying jobs and, with the cost of daycare (daycare assistance is on a waiting list right now), they would actually make less than what it takes for daycare. So, they stay home with their kids instead. I say recently, because these particular clients are fresh in my head, but actually, thinking back, I've seen this scenario in several states over the past 11 years. I think education and career training needs to be an essential and mandatory part of a welfare program, not the half azzed component it is now.

Education and career training should have been an essential part from early on and the parents should have made sure of it. I was raised to think of these things and to work hard and save as much as possible for down times. If the government is always there to pick up any slackers then many would just go and be irresponsible.

[Autumnchik 6]

That's nice in theory, but the reality is, not every parent does promote education. So, should we let another generation perpetuate the same .. or should we try to break the cycle so future generations may believe in the power of education from the get go?

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Of course they shouldn't. Hand outs sound good when people are down and out for sure but look at the other side. Oftentimes people become down and out because of their own irresponisble behavior. If there were no hand outs to begin with then people would be more apt to take stock in their behaviors and act accordingly. If the penalty was no one will be there for when they screw up then they will use the adage, "save for a rainy day" and think more about if their actions would be negative. If there was a handout always then that thinking will be more skewed toward, "this is probably going to hurt me but what the hell I have the government to fall back on."

Even if everyone is responsible, and determined to work, there will never be jobs for everyone.

If you were responsible and determined you would be working. Right?

Thats not the point. If we took laziness out of the equation. There is still no way every can be employed and make a living where they would be free of government assistance. Part of it is just due supply and demand across different occupations. But part of it is due to the nature of a capitalist economic systems. If you make less than everyone else, you will be poor no matter how much you make.

Go talk to someone that lived through the depression then get back to me! I will put this as simply as possible. If big daddy gov. is BROKE then how the ** you gonna get assistance. Cali is cuttin off ppl right and left! There aint no fvckin money! So you best be savin the pennies! SHEESH!