Replies

Sorry about your sister. RIP

That's very kind of you...thank you.

it is not productive to speak of ‘reform’

It absolutely is productive to get people off their butts and get to work,and a contract to do so is one possible solution. To say "just kick them off the program" is,basically,what I am proposing-but in a more positive way that benefits everyone-the free market,you,me,and future generations that would just assume that everyone else should pay their way for them because they've grown up on welfare.

Look at it this way:Right now,the federal government is running the welfare circus. They just dole out check after check,year in and year out,no oversight,no checks and balances,everybody that wants a check gets one,have all the kids you want,we don't care,the taxpayer's paying for it.In other words,the federal government doing what they do best,which is nothing. A person can be on assistance forever-no impetus to find a job,just sit back and collect a check,for years on end.Billions and billions of your tax dollars going down the drain forever with no end in sight.
On the other hand,my proposal would cut the length of time a person can receive benefits to 18 months,not allowing for any more assistance ever after that time period;would enforce compliance with the contract by closely monitoring recipients through regular home visits;would foster an atmosphere of positive growth through training and job placement;and may eventually help to end welfare as we know it today.Think:not a hand-out,but a hand up.

Bottom line: Unless and until we push for more oversight on the recipients of these entitlement programs,and take the federal government out of them and remand them to the state and/or county governments,all of us will continue to be the real victims of welfare,disability payouts and other big government programs so vulnerable to fraud and waste.

I don’t propose to kick anyone off a program. I propose to kick the program off the back of the American taxpayer.

“On the other hand, my proposal would cut the length of time a person can receive benefits to 18 months”

Then you would have them kicked off the program. Please examine what you are doing. You are arguing for a more efficient method of achieving an end of which you do not approve.

For every ambition there is a given objective and a real objective. The purpose of welfare programs is not to mitigate the curse of pauperism. It is to achieve the election and reelection of politicians.

And there are ancillary objectives: 1) the organization of advocacy groups; 2) the development of service staffs to operate the advocacy groups’ organizations; 3) including lobbyists, who beg Congress for grants to aid them in their noble efforts; 4) including the creation of charitable organizations who beg the American People for aid in their noble efforts.

All of which activity comes right back to politicians’ and party coffers, or in otherwise aiding their reelection efforts . . . remarkably.

Recommend you read Memoir on Pauperism, by Alexis de Tocqueville, a very short tome (really little more than a pamphlet) with an excellent introduction by Gertrude Himmelfarb. It can be ordered at most any bookstore or can otherwise be found on the ‘Net.