View Poll Results: Wellfare... Is it un-American

Voters
76. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    33 43.42%
  • No

    43 56.58%
Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 118

Thread: Is wellfare today un-American?

  1. #71
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    Re: Is wellfare today un-American?

    Quote Originally Posted by VoodooChild View Post
    SO THE BIG QUESTION...

    is it unamerican for the federal government to take my money and give it to someone else because they think they are entitled to it.


    MY TWO CENTS...

    America was partly founded on this idea of "the prusuit for happiness". to me it seems wellfare is more like the "gift of happiness". Is there an excuss to be on wellfare today? I dont understand how someone born and raised in Mexico that doesn't speak english can somehow cross the border illegally and find work to better their families back in Mexico but an American born and raised in this nation some how cant make ends meet. Is the American public making excusses for these people on wellfare, and by giving it to them are we just keeping them content with there current situation. I think so. It seems that a majority of people on wellfare keep repeating the same cycle generatin after generation. There are people getting wellfare that have things like cable TV, cellphones, Internet etc... I'm all about helping someone out, but if im going to give someone a helping hand its going to be on my terms. i want to decide if that person deserves my help, not the government deciding for me.
    Let's consider the history.

    Welfare System: Information from Answers.com

    Welfare from the Colonial Period to the Progressive Era

    Treatment of the poor in colonial America was based on the principles set forth in the Elizabethan poor law of 1601. According to this English law, each town or parish was responsible for the care of its own needy. The law distinguished between three categories of the poor: those who were unable to work due to sickness or age, who were to be given material aid; the able-bodied who were unable to find jobs, who were to be provided with work; and the able-bodied but unwilling to work, who were to be instilled with the work ethic. The two important legacies of this law were its stipulation that poor relief is a local responsibility and the burden that it placed on the needy to prove their worthiness for relief.

    Operating on the principles of the Elizabethan poor law, American colonial governments took responsibility for providing for the needy in their localities, through socalled "outdoor relief"—material assistance granted on a case-by-case basis. Localities also auctioned off destitute persons to the lowest bidder, who would receive funds in exchange for caring for them. However, because they were seen as drains on government funds, strangers in need were often warned away from towns, even if they were sick or disabled.

    Beginning in the late eighteenth century, however, increasing urbanization, immigration, population growth, and unemployment led to a rising poor population and the need for a more systematic approach to welfare. Although outdoor relief continued to be practiced, states and municipalities supported "indoor relief" by building institutions to provide for the permanently poor and to instill the able-bodied with habits of work discipline.

    In general, poorhouses were inadequately funded. Moreover, they were often poorly administered, and those who ran them were often corrupt. They lumped together different classes of poor in the same institution: the old, the sick, and the mentally ill were housed with the able-bodied unemployed. Under such circumstances, poor houses were unable to provide adequate care for the needy or instill work habits in the able-bodied. In part, poorhouses were meant to be unpleasant institutions, as the threat of having to live in the poorhouse was intended to deter the poor from idleness. By the beginning of the twentieth century, most poorhouses were transformed into homes for the old-aged who had no one else to care for them.

    By the end of the nineteenth century, many European nations were beginning to build a welfare state. A number of American reformers, believing that government welfare would have to be altered to reflect the new hazards of an industrial economy, sought to emulate the European example. While these reformers failed in their efforts to develop European-style provisions for old-age pensions and unemployment insurance, the Progressive Era (1900–1921) did see the early growth of the American welfare system. For example, from 1911 to 1921, forty-two states introduced workmen's compensation legislation, which provided accident insurance to protect workers against job-related injuries.

    In the Progressive Era, a powerful network of progressive middle-class women lobbied for mothers' pensions, and thirty-nine states developed mothers' aid programs from 1911 to 1921. Under these programs, states gave money to single mothers to help them defray the costs of raising their children in their own homes. The aid was meant to deter the use of child labor to help raise money for the family and to prevent the institutionalization of poor and fatherless children in orphanages, a common practice in the nineteenth century. However, in order to receive this aid, women had to prove that they were fit mothers with suitable homes. Often, the benefits given were inadequate, and the programs only reached a small portion of those in need—in 1931, only 93,620 of 1.5 million female-headed families received mothers' aid.

    Progressives had the most success in instituting programs whose goal was protecting children. In 1912, the federal government established the U.S. Children's Bureau to gather information on the treatment of the nation's children. In 1921, Congress passed the Sheppard-Towner Act, giving matching funds to states to build maternal and child health facilities to fight infant mortality. Despite their accomplishments, Progressives failed to develop an extensive American welfare system—that task was not accomplished until the New Deal.
    Last edited by Morality Games; 07-24-10 at 11:44 PM.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  2. #72
    Frankernaut peepnklown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-16-15 @ 04:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    607

    Re: Is wellfare today un-American?

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    The choice isn't mine it's yours. But I accept your retreat for what it is. I don't want to find solutions that will help eliminate welfare because that is not a position I believe in. So until you can reconcile that fact we have nothing further to talk about.
    I suppose itís a comprehension issue. I am tired of your constant misrepresentation of my points. I never asked you to help eliminate welfare. I have made it very clear what solutions I am talking about. I am tired of your childish comments. If you want to continue this circular debate then we do have nothing more to talk about.
    'The whole universe is going to die!'

  3. #73
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Is wellfare today un-American?

    Quote Originally Posted by peepnklown View Post
    I suppose it’s a comprehension issue. I am tired of your constant misrepresentation of my points. I never asked you to help eliminate welfare. I have made it very clear what solutions I am talking about. I am tired of your childish comments. If you want to continue this circular debate then we do have nothing more to talk about.
    I think you should let it go now. If you really wish to cease and desist, then do so. Everytime you reply, then so will I.

  4. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is wellfare today un-American?

    Sorry republicans ... you lose again.

  5. #75
    Sage
    Barbbtx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    W'Ford TX
    Last Seen
    11-10-12 @ 08:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,467

    Re: Is wellfare today un-American?

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    Looking at how the pilgrims and the puritans behaved in the early days, I would say that welfare is not un-American. They believed in working hard and changing your own lot, but they also believed in charity. I think today's Americans are much more selfish and complacent than those hard workers from history who had to struggle for their personal freedom in a foreign land, and to carve out a new life for themselves.

    I think the right wing would call early Americans "socialist" these days.
    The right wing believes in charity. They are much more charitable than the left. The left wants to take money from the haves and give to the have-nots without their permission.

  6. #76
    Professor
    The_Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    02-06-12 @ 06:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,488

    Re: Is wellfare today un-American?

    Yes and no, because historically speaking, the Massachusetts Bay Colony was founded upon socialist principles. The colony almost failed because people refused to work since they did not own their land nor the fruits of their labor. The governor quickly discovered that by allowing the citizens to own the land and the fruits of their labor did the colony survive.
    Last edited by The_Patriot; 07-25-10 at 12:47 AM.

  7. #77
    White trash on dope.
    d0gbreath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Denton, TX
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,875

    Re: Is wellfare today un-American?

    Quote Originally Posted by chevydriver1123 View Post
    I have guns, dogs and have no problems killing those who I hate. Your argument fails.
    My argument is that the masses burned and destroyed Rome. That is a historical fact. Your idea of fending off and killing desperate people in large numbers only works in your own mind. But relax. We have socialized programs that keep our most needy from becoming insane pyromaniacs.

    Therefore: welfare is American.

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is wellfare today un-American?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    Income redistribution-fueled as a way for dem politicians to gain office and with it power and wealth-is going to destroy this nation
    Welfare wouldn't be necessary if Republican big business owners were not inherantly corrurpt and completely dishonest. Welfare is here to stay and there is NOT A DAMN THING REPUBLICANS CAN DO ABOUT IT.

  9. #79
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Is wellfare today un-American?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    Welfare wouldn't be necessary if Republican big business owners were not inherantly corrurpt and completely dishonest. Welfare is here to stay and there is NOT A DAMN THING REPUBLICANS CAN DO ABOUT IT.
    Ok - while I feel that support *is* American . . . it's not *all* Corporate fault.

    A large part is *still* and always will be personal accountability, actions - and an overall lack of concern. . .there are countless programs out there meant to help people pay for schooling, books, transportation, help people write resumes and everything else - people *have* to take advantage of them.

    Not all areas provide these programs, which is unfortunate . . . but in the areas where these programs are available I think a decrease in the # of people who are on 100% assistance should be evident if they were beneficial (but is it? I can't find statistics on this at all)

    All in all - it's a multi-facet problem and giving people support is only dealing with one portion of the problem, it's not in any way attempting to address the roots of the issue.
    Last edited by Aunt Spiker; 07-29-10 at 10:19 AM.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  10. #80
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,700

    Re: Is wellfare today un-American?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    Welfare wouldn't be necessary if Republican big business owners were not inherantly corrurpt and completely dishonest. Welfare is here to stay and there is NOT A DAMN THING REPUBLICANS CAN DO ABOUT IT.
    explain=that makes no sense whatsoever. Do you think Dem big business owners are pure of heart> or that only Republicans own big businesses.



Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •