Liberals, is the idea of a "workfare" really that deplorable?
Liberals, I apologize if I have falsely peg you as being the greatest source of resistance, but the bulk of the few dissidents have been such, plus questions don’t get any love on here unless it is either calling somebody out or the title is provocative. I’m looking for overall opinions from all political sides, so here we go.
There are different categories of welfare, forms of which I support take the form of unemployment, disability, and temporary welfare (6 months to a year max). What I see as troublesome is the issue of living lives of welfare. The problem with Welfare/Public Assistance is getting people off a dependence of it. This was something that the Clinton administration attempted to deal with. That’s where the real problem lies, getting generations who have become dependent on welfare off the program or having them earn their checks. So my proposal is directed at this segment of society.
General welfare will be replaced with workfare. Where the state provides jobs that are made for the unskilled and the work is generally unfavorable. I stress unfavorable because there needs to be the desire to leave the program, with off programs jobs/careers being more attractive than the welfare provided job/careers.
The work would be consisting of manual labor, contract work, creating state use only items, or environmental work (city/beach clean up projects), pay would be based on results. You can easily tie this in to community betterment by tackling the broken windows theory, and have them clean up the city, improving the atmosphere of low SES areas. The pay is based off results because you need to have scaling rewards and benefits for more independent and productive behavior, these are things that should be encouraged.
For the point of proper socialization, I also believe there should be a alternative work than manual labor or clean up for females. Having a more feminine selection of work for single mothers would be nothing but beneficial, it would also allow consideration for time to raise children.
The money received for work will also have lots of initial limitations. If you all remember the NY welfare families getting 0M in Stimulus cash for school supplies, but spent the money on beer, cigarettes, guns, shoes and drugs. This is nothing short of inane, but not unexpected, money that isn’t earned through hard work will be spent. So I suggest that, half the wages will be held by the state in an individual account for the participant once the individual leaves the program. This will allow a large chunk of the money to be used for whatever life plans you have outside of the program.
¼ of the wages will be paid to the state to supply shelter, food, water, as well as educational or skill based programs to the individual. If ¼ of the wages are given to education/skill based programs, then it would insure that the state will supply such programs to accomplish such, whether they want to work them like student loans where you pay back decades later or the state pays the rest. 1/8 takes on the form of credit for certain stores, and 1/8 for recreational use though I’d like it to eventually scale to ¼ for recreational use for wise spending behavior.
What are your thoughts on my proposed system? and what is your political ideology or identification?
Thank you for your time.
Tags: broken windows theory, clinton administration, community betterment, contract work, dependence, disability, dissidents, environmental work, females, generations, labor contract, liberals, proper socialization, public assistance, rewards, segment, single mothers, unemployment, welfare, workfare
Leave a Reply