Welfare Flaws Essays - Welfare Economics, Welfare, Aid,

Welfare Flaws When it was originally conceived during a time of economic distress, the welfare program supplied aid to those in need. Welfare aid was received primarily by widowed and divorced mothers, and it served as a cushion to break their fall into a different lifestyle, so that they could get back up on their feet and walk. However today it has come to serve as a paycheck for irresponsible and slothful Americans. Welfare is like patching a water main with duct tape; you have to constantly tend to the problem to keep it in check. Welfare programs should show the poor they must learn to fish for themselves if recipients are to eventually work for their sustenance. Thus, we must change our welfare system. In 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt said: "I can now see the end of public assistance in America." FDR's declaration did not come true despite the expenditure of what were then unparalleled amounts of Federal funds for a variety of programs to help the poor. The sums were intended to give the needy a boost that would theoretically enable them to pursue economic success. That would not work. Since then, and over the past 25 years, welfare spending designed to achieve FDR's goal has totaled hundreds of billions of dollars. Since then, income support to welfare recipients multiplied more than five times in constant dollars. (That is, relative to inflation and cost of living adjustments.) Since then, the idea of ending public assistance in America has become more and more absurd. Since the early days when welfare (aid for dependent children) helped widows or divorced women make the difficult change to a new socio-economic stratum, it's major function has changed. In a Los Angeles Times poll from 1985, 70 percent of poor women said it is "almost always" or "often" true that "poor young women have babies so they can collect welfare." Two thirds said that welfare "almost always" or"often" encourages fathers to avoid family responsibilities. Thus, we can be certain that not only does welfare back wrongful births, but recipients agree it seems to promote them. This is impractical when we consider that the public assistance in large part is meant to be a last resort for remedying the problems of out-of-wedlock-births, not creating new ones. We cannot enter the new millennium without plans to rid our nation of welfare as it exists today, and here's why: researchers conclude that welfare handouts reduce the recipients' willingness to work: "significant net negative impacts on labor supply" they say. Without welfare, often the poor's negative attitudes, rather than a lack of work opportunities is to blame for keeping them from being employed. Some studies have shown these to be not being able to get to work on time, not paying attention on the job, or working a full schedule. Little then is left of their already lacking work ethic and enthusiasm after most enter welfare. Without shorter time limits on aid, the chance is little that recipients will commit to the same obligations that are assumed by other citizens--to try to become self-sufficient through work, education, and by practicing good family behavior. Welfare does not help abolish any problems, rather, it just tidies them up a bit for the problematic - at a price too expensive for our country. During sad economic times, welfare aid was received primarily by widowed and divorced mothers, and it served just as a cushion to break their fall into a different lifestyle, so that they could get back up on their feet and walk. Sadly, today it has come to serve as a paycheck for irresponsible and slothful Americans. Welfare programs should show the poor they must learn to fish for themselves if recipients are to eventually work for their sustenance. Thus, we must change our welfare system. Welfare Flaws Essays - Welfare Economics, Welfare, Aid, Welfare Flaws When it was originally conceived during a time of economic distress, the welfare program supplied aid to those in need. Welfare aid was received primarily by widowed and divorced mothers, and it served as a cushion to break their fall into a different lifestyle, so that they could get back up on their feet and walk. However today it has come to serve as a paycheck for irresponsible and slothful Americans. Welfare is like patching a water main with duct tape; you have to constantly tend to the problem to keep it in check. Welfare programs should show the poor they must learn to fish for themselves if recipients are to eventually work for their sustenance. Thus, we must change our welfare system. In 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt said: "I can now see the end of public assistance in America." FDR's declaration did not come true despite the expenditure of what were then unparalleled amounts of Federal funds for a variety of programs to help the poor. The sums were intended to give the needy a boost that would theoretically enable them to pursue economic success. That would not work. Since then, and over the past 25 years, welfare spending designed to achieve FDR's goal has totaled hundreds of billions of dollars. Since then, income support to welfare recipients multiplied more than five times in constant dollars. (That is, relative to inflation and cost of living adjustments.) Since then, the idea of ending public assistance in America has become more and more absurd. Since the early days when welfare (aid for dependent children) helped widows or divorced women make the difficult change to a new socio-economic stratum, it's major function has changed. In a Los Angeles Times poll from 1985, 70 percent of poor women said it is "almost always" or "often" true that "poor young women have babies so they can collect welfare." Two thirds said that welfare "almost always" or"often" encourages fathers to avoid family responsibilities. Thus, we can be certain that not only does welfare back wrongful births, but recipients agree it seems to promote them. This is impractical when we consider that the public assistance in large part is meant to be a last resort for remedying the problems of out-of-wedlock-births, not creating new ones. We cannot enter the new millennium without plans to rid our nation of welfare as it exists today, and here's why: researchers conclude that welfare handouts reduce the recipients' willingness to work: "significant net negative impacts on labor supply" they say. Without welfare, often the poor's negative attitudes, rather than a lack of work opportunities is to blame for keeping them from being employed. Some studies have shown these to be not being able to get to work on time, not paying attention on the job, or working a full schedule. Little then is left of their already lacking work ethic and enthusiasm after most enter welfare. Without shorter time limits on aid, the chance is little that recipients will commit to the same obligations that are assumed by other citizens--to try to become self-sufficient through work, education, and by practicing good family behavior. Welfare does not help abolish any problems, rather, it just tidies them up a bit for the problematic - at a price too expensive for our country. During sad economic times, welfare aid was received primarily by widowed and divorced mothers, and it served just as a cushion to break their fall into a different lifestyle, so that they could get back up on their feet and walk. Sadly, today it has come to serve as a paycheck for irresponsible and slothful Americans. Welfare programs should show the poor they must learn to fish for themselves if recipients are to eventually work for their sustenance. Thus, we must change our welfare system.