• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Welfare

How should welfare be handled?


  • Total voters
    47
This is an article on Welfare and germain to this discussion.

The Real Welfare Problem: Government Giveaways to the Corporate 1% | Common Dreams

"But it’s not about welfare queens vs hard working whites; its not about race or ethnic divisions; it’s not about any of the standard Republican bait and switch, divide and conquer BS.

It’s about handouts to the uber-rich and the corporations."

From your link:

Let’s run the numbers.

Corporate Subsidies: We spend $59 billion on social welfare programs, but more than $92 billion on corporate subsidies. According to the Environmental Law Institute, fossil fuel industries alone get more than $70 billion in subsidies, with most going to the oil and gas sector. Yeah, we certainly can’t afford to deprive Exxon of its record profits just to give money to needy kids.

I've got a better idea: Let's eliminate that $92B entirely, cut that $59 about in half by eliminating fraud and long term dependency, and apply $122B to cutting the deficit.
 
This is an article on Welfare and germain to this discussion.

The Real Welfare Problem: Government Giveaways to the Corporate 1% | Common Dreams

"But it’s not about welfare queens vs hard working whites; its not about race or ethnic divisions; it’s not about any of the standard Republican bait and switch, divide and conquer BS.

It’s about handouts to the uber-rich and the corporations."

Where in the world did that site come up with it's numbers? Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts shows a budget analysis and shows total welfare spending at $451.9 billion for 2012 by the Federal Government and an estimated $679.2 billion by state and federal governments. With an additional $323.9 in vendor payments (welfare) under Heathcare. That is a total of $775.8 billion by the Federal Government. Your source says only $59 billion, either they are blowing smoke up someones ass or they are using a very, very narrow definition of social welfare programs.

Also, their claims of "subsidies" I don't get either. No where in the budget does it budget $70 Billion to oil and gas. Maybe there are tax breaks that total that amount, but that is not subsidies, that is taxes. Funny how they bring up "overseas shelters" for profits earned outside the US. The US is the only industrialized nation that taxes on global profit instead of only national. The US also has the highest corporate tax rates with total corporate taxation at 64% for the US.

The US needs to redo it's entire tax structure, sure. But taxation is not our biggest budgetary problem, mismanagement and overspending are the biggest problems. With total Welfare programs spending, by the Federal Government not including local governments, ($775.8 billion) higher than we spend on military defense ($716.3 billion). Welfare looks like a pretty good place to start looking for cuts, sure, defense needs to be cleaned up also, but welfare must be addressed also.
 
Where in the world did that site come up with it's numbers? Government Spending Details: Federal State Local for 2012 - Charts shows a budget analysis and shows total welfare spending at $451.9 billion for 2012 by the Federal Government and an estimated $679.2 billion by state and federal governments. With an additional $323.9 in vendor payments (welfare) under Heathcare. That is a total of $775.8 billion by the Federal Government. Your source says only $59 billion, either they are blowing smoke up someones ass or they are using a very, very narrow definition of social welfare programs.

Also, their claims of "subsidies" I don't get either. No where in the budget does it budget $70 Billion to oil and gas. Maybe there are tax breaks that total that amount, but that is not subsidies, that is taxes. Funny how they bring up "overseas shelters" for profits earned outside the US. The US is the only industrialized nation that taxes on global profit instead of only national. The US also has the highest corporate tax rates with total corporate taxation at 64% for the US.

The US needs to redo it's entire tax structure, sure. But taxation is not our biggest budgetary problem, mismanagement and overspending are the biggest problems. With total Welfare programs spending, by the Federal Government not including local governments, ($775.8 billion) higher than we spend on military defense ($716.3 billion). Welfare looks like a pretty good place to start looking for cuts, sure, defense needs to be cleaned up also, but welfare must be addressed also.

That 775.8 billion is an eye opening figure, no doubt, but just what is included under the general term "welfare"?
 
That 775.8 billion is an eye opening figure, no doubt, but just what is included under the general term "welfare"?

The link provided provides a breakdown. The $323.9 billion figure is under Healthcare, vendor payments (welfare). The $451.9 figure is under the heading of welfare, which it breaks down to Family and children, unemployment, workers compensation, housing, and social exclusions nec. It further breaks down each of these categories (click the + to expand), but the list is much too long to transfer here. Depending on your own belief about what constitutes welfare and what doesn't, you can break out what you believe it to be.

While I do not normally include unemployment in my welfare philosophy of what is welfare, like the data provided, I do differentiate between unemployment trust (the Federal government spent no money on it) and the trust fund that employers pay into. To me, that trust is not welfare where the government payments are.
 
Should be left to the Feds. Generally the states that need the most help (poor southern states) are the one's that can least afford it. It's just reality.
 
We must increase healthcare, education and salary.
 
We must increase healthcare, education and salary.

Healthcare--only for productive citizens, the willfully non-productive, screw'm.

Education--absolutely, but we need to address how funds are spent, not just give a failed system more money so it can continue failing

Salary-- no, that should be based upon competitive rates for the type of labor and training needed. Our labor pool already costs us more for the level of quality than necessary. American Labor cannot compete at current levels with imported goods that are cheaper. The American public over the last 40 or so years has repeatedly based it purchasing on price or quality, neither of which American Labor can compete with. Automation will continue to reduce the amount of unskilled uneducated labor needed anyways.

Education is certainly the key, we need a total revamp of our education systems and get them actually producing educated and skilled workers that will be needed in America. Unskilled and uneducated manual labor as the core of our economy is done. It's over, adapt or fail. Increasing salary and costs for that labor segment is the road to failure.
 
What are your opinions on welfare management? Several mainstream options of handling welfare are in the poll.
The federal government should not be involved. Care of the needy is a responsibility that was never delegated by the states to the federal government.
 
What are your opinions on welfare management? Several mainstream options of handling welfare are in the poll.

Federal oversight on welfare is a must due to the politicalization of people's needs.
 
Federal oversight on welfare is a must due to the politicalization of people's needs.

What you really mean is you want the Feds to make sure some states do not take sensible actions that would embarrass others.

I think allowing each state more leeway in welfare laws would be instructive. We have seen the performance difference in Economic approaches between the larger states, why not give them a shot at different welfare options and lets see how they really compare? Let Texas adopt it's workfare ideas from the past while allowing Cali. to keep handing out bigger and bigger chunks of the pie for free and see how the two do.

I bet in the end, the workfare system will greatly outdo the welfare system in affordability while still providing a "safety" net. But then again, maybe not as all those liberal welfarist run from Texas to other states to avoid actually working for what they get will greatly screw the numbers up. Oh, wait, liberals running from the state? Yippeee, lets "get'r done".
 
Back
Top Bottom