I definitely agree with this but it's so politically unpopular that it will probably never happen. The politicians will bankrupt us before they do something that loses so many votes.
Hmm.. I think that those people who live off the government should give back...They can do work on roads, picking up trash and various other things around the state to pay back a little.....
The thing is . . . most of those people are disabled. The few healthy people still on welfare are indigent mothers with dependent children. To put them to work would require putting their kids in day care which would cost more than is saved by working them. It's really not a huge number of people and they are limited to 3 years of benefits. Eliminating all of this spending doesn't amount to beans when dealing with defense, medicare, and social security spending. I think we should have something like the CCC back in the 30's. People who are willing and able to work could go to a government camp and get room and board and pay for doing conservation work and other work needed on federal land, national parks, national forests, and federal highways. Maybe learn some skills to get hired in the private sector.
I suppose you are right, but as I pointed out in a post earlier, I think those who are disabled should get care no matter what.. I guess what I am more speaking of when talking about paying back, are those families living in government housing and all things of that sort. They should be required to do something, even if its a single mother, just based on what they can handle. I mean, about 80% of these places do not even require these people to have a clean yard.... To add to that, it also seems that these government housing programs end up a long term solution to families when it should be short term..
not all of them are disabled though, and the disabled people could be rolling cigs at mental hospitals. there are tons of government jobs that disabled people could do.
Now, government housing and food stamps are definitely programs that could be tightened up. Both programs are too easy to defraud. Public housing for the poorest people is OK by me, especially the elderly. We don't want shantytown barrios emerging like the third world. But I do think that public housing should be tiered, as well. The only housing you should be entitled to is basic subsistence housing. It won't be big and it won't have carpet, and it won't have air conditioning or cable TV. If you want these things then a substantial co-payment is required. Most people in public housing work at low-paying jobs. If you want to live like the Huxtables, then get a better job and earn a bigger paycheck and get off the dole.
