Firstly as I said in my original post a big problem with the welfare system is we penalize welfare recipients as they are trying to move off the system.
Say you’ve lost your job.
You have three kids. You’ve had the job for a decent amount of time. You get a severance package and you’re on unemployment for quite some time. By the time your unemployment and severance money has run out, you still cannot find a job.
You have to go on welfare. You’re receiving the government checks, getting food stamps, et cetra.
After six months on welfare, you finally find a job. A very low paying one, you find a job as a cashier at a supermarket, your salary is roughly $5.25/hour, a pittance above minimum wage. You’re pulling in at max around 35 hours per week (store doesn’t need you for anymore than that.)
Now, the problem is, you’ve got a job, but it’s still way too low paying. But welfare is cut back drastically when you get a job, any job.
That’s a problem.
Now, I’ll be the first to say that I don’t feel sorry for most poor people. I grew up with poor people, I grew up all around poor people in rural West Virginia. In fact there weren’t any people I knew of within a 20 mile radius that wouldn’t be considered poor.
I don’t feel sorry for them because most people perpetuate their poverty by bad decision making. The economic system shouldn’t hold bad decision makers aka poor people up on some kind of pedestal like they are saints down-and-out because of bad luck.
My family and many of our neighbors lived paycheck to paycheck. What is truly sad is it didn’t have to be that way. There was certainly a shitload of money spent on booze and cigs that didn’t have to be. There was in fact a lot of money spent very stupidly that did not have to be.
Even actively trying to improve my lot in life, getting very good grades in High School and scoring well on my standardized tests AND receiving full scholarships to some good schools I just couldn’t afford to attend.
There are lots of costs of going to college, for yourself and for your family, that no scholarship, not even a full ride, can cover.
So at age 17 I joined the Army. After my tour of duty was up (was 23 at that time) I attended college, having saved a substantial sum of money privately (enlisted men don’t make much money, but there aren’t many expenses as the army subsidizes a lot of your life when you’re active duty) and receiving of course full college costs paid for by Uncle Sam.
Anyways from that point on my life is an interesting story, I joined the Army again, lots of other places and occupations have been had in my fairly short life after then as well. But this become tangenital.
The fact of the matter is I have little respect for most poor people. Most of them are there simply because they are chronically stupid and bad decision makers. Education is offered to many people back home that I know who are on welfare. Many cousins of mine with 5+ kids are milking the gov’t for all they are worth, despite the fact I know they could easily have turned out differently if not for apathy towards life.
Despite my complete disrespect for the majority of poor people, their chronic poverty and child-rearing is a drain on the economy.
So if we are going to be putting them on welfare in the first place, we have to have a good structured system to get them off.
Drastically reducing benefits when someone gets a job is bad. I think there should be a period of say 3 months we’ll call it a “grace period” where you still receive full benefits despite being employed (exceptions would be made if you suddenly have a job paying very well.) This will give people time to get on their feet.
After that period is up maybe give them yet another 3 month period where they receive reduced benefits.
After that they will be off the dole. But they can have their case reviewed at this point. IF they can prove that they are still slightly in rough straits I’d say let them continue to use certain goverment programs like Medicaid and give them certain special subsidies for their children.
Now, this is a strange stance for a fiscal conservative to take. But I think that the welfare system and people on it are sort of a self-perpetuating cycle.
People like my cousins that are receiving various forms of government assistance at any given time (3 of them I know haven’t been off food stamps in 15 years) are examples of being a chronic vacuum.
I think if we structured the exit system better, we could more easily move people completely off government assistance without having a high rate of recidivism.
As another safety net we need to strengthen protections that keep people from going on welfare in the first place.
Eventually through a managed welfare policy I think we will be able to get many of the able-bodied peopel (with and without families) off the dole and we can slowly move the economy in the right direction.
That’s a long term goal that is more of an ideal than something I realistically hope to see.
In the here and now I think some of my proposals represent what needs to be done to insure welfare goes more to people who need it and less to people who are just on it because that is how they think they are supposed to live.
Obviously permanently disabled people are a whole separate class from low-income individuals and should be considered so (and in fact are.)
In the case of children here are a few things that I think needs to be done:
- More after school programs.
A lot of schools in my area (up to Junior High/Middle School) offer an after school program that basically babysits kids for the parents. It only costs around $35/week. I think the price of that is far cheaper than you will find trying to find child care yourself.
I’m sure a good chunk of the costs come from local bond money, in fact I think it definitely does. But I’d say the costs to the economy are lower than the costs of making child care unavailable for welfare mothers and in turn keeping the mothers from attaining a job that has any chance of getting them off the dole.
- No more children
If you go on welfare I don’t think you should be allowed to continue to produce more children. There should be a tradeoff in stealing other people’s money for yourself. If you want that money then you should agree not to acquire anymore dependants during the period you are on the dole.
If it sounds like authoritarianism, I don’t really think it is. Because people shouldn’t consider welfare free, they should be forced to accept some tradeoffs, and if they decide they want another kid so damn much then the government should say “no more money for you, oh, and now it looks like you cannot adequately take care of your 17 children, so we’re taking them.”