NY candidate: Prison dorms for welfare recipients

[slim 1,525]

when it concerns the difficulty of implementing a work for welfare program I think it is completely irrelevant.

It is irrelevant until someone comes up with a scheme to fix it and happens to be a party member of a party that's not popular with the group of folks who would benefit most from the scheme.

As we've seen a few weeks ago, that devolves into a matter of color pretty quickly.

[Peikko 1,575]

It is irrelevant until someone comes up with a scheme to fix it and happens to be a party member of a party that's not popular with the group of folks who would benefit most from the scheme.

As we've seen a few weeks ago, that devolves into a matter of color pretty quickly.

The biggest problem with modern politics seems to me to be the fact that the actual voters benefit very little from the implementation of any policy. The winners always seem to be those who implement the policies and the lobbyists. Big issues drive the debate, and often derail them - while the voter argues the toss about such things, the politician gets on with lining his own, and the special interest pockets. It is a mess.

i may have to change my superstitions.

[slim 1,525]

The biggest problem with modern politics seems to me to be the fact that the actual voters benefit very little from the implementation of any policy. The winners always seem to be those who implement the policies and the lobbyists. Big issues drive the debate, and often derail them - while the voter argues the toss about such things, the politician gets on with lining his own, and the special interest pockets. It is a mess.

Thumbs up!

The sad thing is, the only way to change it is to vote for guys like this who are proposing "racist" policies.

[HAL 9000 96]

they actually do make them work in NY already. They have to go through a job-training course at the Dept. of Labor and they get them jobs - then they lose their welfare, find a way to get fired so they can get it back

Sounds like that's a loophole that could be closed no?

I don't buy this 'entitlement' mentality for a majority of recipients, really. Many people may be completely stupid, but they know or should know that the income from most jobs are more than welfare checks. This is something so many opponents of welfare will obviously use incorrectly, particularly on election years but not too soon before an election.

[Susita 175]

Sounds like that's a loophole that could be closed no?

I don't buy this 'entitlement' mentality for a majority of recipients, really. Many people may be completely stupid, but they know or should know that the income from most jobs are more than welfare checks. This is something so many opponents of welfare will obviously use incorrectly, particularly on election years but not too soon before an election.

I'm more on the left you could say, but the welfare system is one of the big things I have a serious problem with... and this is why. There's a lot of social-service based programs here on Long Island that are gobbled up by people who abuse the system and the people who really need them cannot take advantage of them or have a harder time getting the help they need because of these abusers.

And I say this because I have family members and people I grew up with who I see would rather be lazy and collect cash assistance, Section 8 & foodstamps than get up every day and go to work. So this means free housing, food and a debit card for them to buy what they need. Plus they have medicaid - so free health care. And now they're giving out cell phones with free minutes. However, a good friend of mine was abused by her husband so badly she was put in the hospital, so she took her kids and ran - and could not get section 8 or help with rent and they told her to stay in a homeless shelter with her 3 kids - while the guy down the street deals drugs and drives a Lexus and the county pays his rent

Give me a freakin' break!! They give you all the tools (job training, free education, resume writing workshops, job fairs, I could go on and on) but people work their way around it and go back to collecting. There needs to be some kind of line drawn.

The system is broke. They need to fix it so we stop wasting money on lazy freeloaders and get it to the people who actually really need it.

[Susita 175]

That isn't really the same thing - asking welfare recipients who are unemployed to seek employment, providing training for them to improve their chances of getting employment and demanding that they prove they are actively seeking employment is perfectly reasonable. Demanding that a welfare recipient completes some kind of piece work task before they get their food stamps or whatever really isn't.

I don't find it totally unreasonable. I don't like the idea proposed here, but there are too many abusers of this system where I live, that like I said above.... the people who honestly need help just don't get it. These people need to be held accountable in some way.

[HAL 9000 96]

I think the abusers can be identified and given little to no choice... welfare will be timed post job-training and job-procurement. Period. Doesn't need to be a partisan issue, but we already know it will be.

[Amby 490]

the "hood" scares me

[Peikko 1,575]

I don't find it totally unreasonable. I don't like the idea proposed here, but there are too many abusers of this system where I live, that like I said above.... the people who honestly need help just don't get it. These people need to be held accountable in some way.

By all means fix the problems and hold them accountable, but requiring work for benefits is not the solution, for practical reasons, one of which I outlined.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The lesson here is..."This is what happens when you are dependent on government" You will notice he is not suggesting this for people that make their own living, he cannot.

When you put your hand out, when you accept your living from the government, you become subject to them and who elects them. Bad situation. We should eliminate the need for welfare by requiring education through at least high school. The governor could do this just as well. But there is no desire by politicians to end welfare or those that need welfare...politicians just wish to use them as a football to kick around to please their constituents.

[Peikko 1,575]

The lesson here is..."This is what happens when you are dependent on government" You will notice he is not suggesting this for people that make their own living, he cannot.

When you put your hand out, when you accept your living from the government, you become subject to them and who elects them. Bad situation. We should eliminate the need for welfare by requiring education through at least high school. The governor could do this just as well. But there is no desire by politicians to end welfare or those that need welfare...politicians just wish to use them as a football to kick around to please their constituents.

Education is great, no argument there, but if there are not enough jobs available, and certainly not enough to keep every citizen who is willing to work above the poverty line then some welfare is necessary - not to mention the reality that not all welfare is targeted at people who are even in a position to work.

I do not also believe that all politicians are this cynical - I believe they are self interested for the most part, but not that they deliberately want to keep voters dependent on hand outs - that is a few steps too far down some fantasy about how the ruling elite subjugates the citizens. Voting reform would fix a lot of problems that are currently the driver of which persons end up as part of the ruling elite.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

If I need to take a drug test to get a job, then you need a drug test to get welfare! This simple requirement would eliminate quite a few.

Edited August 22, 2010 by Col. Lingus

[Peikko 1,575]

If I need to take a drug test to get a job, then you need a drug test to get welfare! This simple requirement would eliminate quite a few.

Eliminate them? There needs to be a much more pro-active stance taken on drug addicts for sure, they cause an awful lot of the anti-social problems in society but marginalizing them in the hope they just go away will not reduce the types of problems that are down to the behaviour of addicts, it might even increase them.

[Susita 175]

Eliminate them? There needs to be a much more pro-active stance taken on drug addicts for sure, they cause an awful lot of the anti-social problems in society but marginalizing them in the hope they just go away will not reduce the types of problems that are down to the behaviour of addicts, it might even increase them.

There needs to be some limit though. When the gov't pays for a drug addict to go to rehab for the upteenth time (because they've committed a crime and been mandateed by the court), only to come out and relapse again, not work, and collect welfare.... a line has to be drawn.

And I know they need help, and the people who want the help, take it. The ones who don't just go because they're being forced to by the court or because they've run out of money for drugs and don't want to go through withdrawals on their own.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Eliminate them? There needs to be a much more pro-active stance taken on drug addicts for sure, they cause an awful lot of the anti-social problems in society but marginalizing them in the hope they just go away will not reduce the types of problems that are down to the behaviour of addicts, it might even increase them.

Put them in the prison dorms. Two year program including counseling. Put ankle bracelets on them after a 90 day dry out period. Match their work skills with an employer that only has to pay minimum wage which 80% goes to the expenses to pay for the program.