Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

U.S. Welfare Reform

Rate this topic


softwareNerd

Recommended Posts

This New York Times article about U.S. Welfare rolls, talks about NY City welfare case loads dropping since 1996, and adds that "Nationally, the caseload has fallen by more than half since the federal law was signed in August 1996."

I did some checking, and data from the governmental agency "Administration for Children and Families" shows that about 2% of the U.S. population received "Temporary Assistance for Needy Families" (TANF) in the early 1960s. Some snapshot years:

  • 1960: 1.7%
  • 1970: 4.1%
  • 1980: 4.7%
  • 1990: 4.6%
  • 1995: 5.2%
  • 1998: 3.2%
  • 1999: 2.6%
  • 2000: 2.1% [5.8 million individuals]
  • 2001: ??? [5.5 million individuals]
  • 2003: ??? [4.9 million individuals]

On the face of it, the 1996 welfare reform laws seems to have reduced recipients quite drastically.

From what I can tell, the only major requirement in the 1996 law was that recipients must show that they are actively looking for work, or must be in training or in some community-service type activity that can hone their skills.

For anyone looking for more info, this Heritage Foundation link has a good summary. There's a lot of potential to do more. A quote from the article: "Only one federal welfare program--AFDC--was reformed in 1996. The other 69 major means-tested programs, including food stamps, housing, and Medicaid, were left largely unchanged with no requirements to be engaged in constructive activity, such as work or education, as a condition for receiving aid."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

It is quite correct that the rolls were reduced, but does this mean they were better off? Just because they are no longer recieving welfare does not mean they found a job and are doing better and no longer need the assitance. I believe the only way to ever reduce the welfare rolls is to set a living wage, with universal health care. Currently, people on welfare can make more than a person full time on min. wage. (BOTH of which are below the poverty line and unacceptable) So if a persons only option is a min wage job, why would they want to be off welfare? Should the answer to be to reduce welfare and risk starvation and excess crime? I dont think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only acceptable measure is to remove welfare completely. Raising minimum wage up to whatever standards someone out there says 'oh, that's not poverty' solves nothing. You end up with a new form of welfare with the laziest looking for the job with the least amount of work knowing they can still get paid as much as any other. Raising minimum wage up to the 'poverty' line would just make the 'poverty' line increase again so those would still be back in poverty. You'd create another entitlement oriented group of workers that treat a job that allows a higher standard of living as a right instead of a privilege. There is so many ways your solution is wrong I don't think I could list them all. I can't even comprehend all the damage universal health care will cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the only way to ever reduce the welfare rolls is to set a living wage, with universal health care.

Are you sure you are posting on the right forum??? Universal health care is idea is just plain silly and minimum wage laws are one of the causes of unemployment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People should want to get off welfare because they are getting benefits they have not earned. THATS why...that is what their motivation should be. They should want to do their personal best because they should realize that they are responsible for their own life. No one else.

Welfare is a hard chain for people to break that have grown up within the cycle. But that doesn't mean they still should not take responsbility for themself. Eliminating all programs tomorrow wouldn't work: we would have a riot on our hands. It is something that would have to be done over time. But publicaly funded welfare can and should be elimated.

Private charities can help those that really need help, such as the sick and elderly, and orphans...etc...or those that may have temporary issues through no fault of their own. There are too many people on welfare that stay on welfare because it is easy. I have known several people that have decided to not report their live in boyfriend (who worked and was the father of their kid(s) ) so they could keep getting their benefits.

Regarding a living wage. You should be paid according to your ability not your need. I believe a billing clerk in a medical office deserves more pay than a street sweeper because her job required more training and more skill. Wages should be paid based on the market rate and the skills required of the position. If the employer chooses the pay more for retention puporses, hey, thats great. That is how the employer makes his/her company more attractive to potential employees. But required employers to pay based on an employees need and not what they do for work? That is communism.

Just curious, I believe you are new to the forum, have you read any of Rand's works, such as The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

How much does a single person usually get from welfare? I make enough to support myself but I was thinking about trying to get a little welfare money if i could. That way I can get back some of the money I had to pay the government for this program and all the other unnecessary things they make me pay for. Its not like Im receiving something unearned, its my money they would be giving back to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much does a single person usually get from welfare? I make enough to support myself but I was thinking about trying to get a little welfare money if i could. That way I can get back some of the money I had to pay the government for this program and all the other unnecessary things they make me pay for. Its not like Im receiving something unearned, its my money they would be giving back to me.
Out of curiousity, how much do or would you get from the government, and how does that compare to what you pay in taxes. There are these books that list the tens of thousands of government entitlement programs that let you lay claim to various moneys (and they don't mention things like road repairs, or courts and police which you aren't required to pay for). They imply that you can get hundreds of thousands of dollars a year from these programs. The one thing I have never been able to figure out is, how much of it would be "my money" and how much would be "your money". I'm pretty sure, for example, that if I were to claim $100,000 a year in government benefits, that would be more than the part that is "my money". Have you figured out a way to measure how much is yours vs. mine?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well how much of taxes paid are to fund proper government programs? I know taxes deduct about 25% of my income, and I'm thinking it should only be around 5-10% if everything was correct. I think Im making about $15000/year before taxes. Right now taxes will take out about $3700/year, and if taxes deducted, say 7.5% of my income instead it would take out about $1100/year. So if I wanted to make sure I only got back "my money" from a welfare program, I should only receive about $2500/year or $200/month. Thats a good amount of money in the financial position Im in right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have personal experience of welfare in action. A few years ago a friend of mine left home and didn't have anywhere to go so he was put in a state-run accomodation. At the time he had just left school so did not have a job yet and was told that because of this he would have his rent and his bills paid for him, however when he got a job he was told that he would have to pay for all this himself because he was no longer in need. However the job didn't pay well and as a result he only earned about £1 a week! So naturally he quit his job and took the welfare support.

Don't even get me started on universal healthcare, on the NHS I would have had to wait 2 years for an operation I needed, instead I worked for six months and paid for it privately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...