What If?

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Madeline, Dec 13, 2010.

  1. Madeline
    Offline

    Madeline BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,505
    Thanks Received:
    1,624
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cleveland. Feel mah pain.
    Ratings:
    +1,624
    Suppose we had a social program motif under which an able bodied adult who received aid had to repay that aid in some fashion? Not the children, and not the elderly or infirm, just able-bodied adults.

    I have in mind something very low level, so their ability to function economically would not be impaired -- like a repayment that did not exceed a certain percent of income, etc. And just FYI, benefits that flow from employment -- worker's comp, disability and unemployment insurance pay outs -- are not the sort of social program I would consider. IMO, you "buy" these sorts of insurance and shouldn't be penalized if you eventually have a claim.

    I'm thinking more of food stamps, Section 8 housing subsidies, subsidized child care, Medicaid, etc. Let's say you grew up middle class, started a family and hit a snag in your early thirties, costing your fellow citizens $10,000 to get you and your children back on your feet.

    If we did this, would people feel less resentment about the social programs we have? Would there be less waste? Or would it just be pointless window dressing IYO?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Granny
    Offline

    Granny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,121
    Thanks Received:
    785
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    Rocky Top, TN
    Ratings:
    +1,255
    Many of our problems overlap each other and fuel the continued ballooning costs of all of them - whether financial or behavioral.

    At the risk of being beaten to death by angry teachers, I would like to start with education. I realize that schools are already way overcrowded and that teachers sometimes have a workload from hell. Because the vast majority of welfare recipients are not very educated, why can't we start by mandating that those parents must to go to school as a condition of receiving welfare support? Why not have those parents in the classroom with their children every single day of the school year - a "learn as your child learns" sort of thing. In the case of multiple children there could be a "weekly rotation" sort of thing so the parent can have classroom time with each child. The parent could sort of supply "individual attention" that teachers simply cannot do. The parent would be responsible and accountable for their child's classroom behavior - maybe it would result in less classroom disruption, bullying, violence, etc. or reduce continued violence in the home and in the streets. It would mean that these parents and their children will at a very minimum get 12 years of education, a diploma, be more capable of finding a job that will reduce or move them off the welfare dole. Home Ec. should cover a broad spectrum of issues and be a required class for parents - a least one day a week - maybe they would learn some good healthy eating habits and also be wiser in how to get the most out of their food stamp dollars (learning to budget) - might help with the obesity problem.

    Twelve years is long enough for someone to be on welfare. Educate the parents - they now have the tools to get some kind of employment. Educate the children - give them hope for the future and maybe they will never be on welfare rolls at all.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2010
  3. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    Half of America will end up supervising the other half and I guess we can just print fake money to pay the ones doing the supervising. I'm afraid were aapproaching the time when it's everyone for themselves and those they care about. The rest are lost causes. Maybe some other nice country will help them.
     
  4. PLYMCO_PILGRIM
    Offline

    PLYMCO_PILGRIM Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    17,416
    Thanks Received:
    2,855
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    America's Home Town
    Ratings:
    +2,863
    If we did this, make those who receive government handouts pay them back directly and proportionately, then these very programs would cease to be handouts and cease to be entitlements. They would instead be considered investments, much like the social security that people receive (people pay into it their whole lives so its not an entitlement, its a governmnet sponsored forced retirement savings plan).

    How would we ensure that those who receive the "loan" are forced to repay said loan directly and proportionately though. How would we do it without allowing for government sponsored indentured servitude to pay it back?

    I dunno....I like the path your on but the details are tough.

    EXAMPLE1 :

    I lose my job.
    I can't find one.
    I get $10,000 from the government to help me through the rough patch
    I find a job
    I now pay x% of my income to the government until the $10,000 is repaid

    Example2 :

    I lose my job.
    I can't find one.
    I get $10,000 to help from the government.
    I can't find a Job


    What happens in example 2?
     
  5. Big Black Dog
    Offline

    Big Black Dog Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    22,906
    Thanks Received:
    5,107
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,702
    Well, maybe this is a solution to a couple of problems... Maybe people who are collecting government aid could donate a kidney or something to help out the folks who need transplants? This way, you would truly being giving back to your community!:lol:
     
  6. Madeline
    Offline

    Madeline BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,505
    Thanks Received:
    1,624
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cleveland. Feel mah pain.
    Ratings:
    +1,624
    Let's say you are 55 when you lose your job, and never do find another. For seven years, until you are eligible for Social Security, the government aids you to the tune of $10,000 a year or a total of $70,000. Here are some possibilities:

    * You have "aged out" and owe nothing.

    * You have no earned income and so you pay nothing, but upon your death, if you have assets the government gets repaid first.

    * The government insures your life for $70,000 and passes that expense on to you, with the government as the beneficiary.

    I dunno, PLYMCO_PILGRIM. I was just wondering if such a change would reduce waste, resentment or is too silly an idea to consider.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2010
  7. Madeline
    Offline

    Madeline BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,505
    Thanks Received:
    1,624
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cleveland. Feel mah pain.
    Ratings:
    +1,624
    So IYO the idea has no merit, because it would be too hard to administer? What if we privatize the repayment supervision, dilloduck? Pay a bunch of young lawyers (or whomever) say, 10% of the amounts collected?
     
  8. Madeline
    Offline

    Madeline BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,505
    Thanks Received:
    1,624
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cleveland. Feel mah pain.
    Ratings:
    +1,624
    I think this idea has value, Granny. I really do. I like the way you think, Madam!
     
  9. PLYMCO_PILGRIM
    Offline

    PLYMCO_PILGRIM Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    17,416
    Thanks Received:
    2,855
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    America's Home Town
    Ratings:
    +2,863
    At least your thinking madeline while most seem to just be reacting.
     
  10. Madeline
    Offline

    Madeline BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,505
    Thanks Received:
    1,624
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cleveland. Feel mah pain.
    Ratings:
    +1,624
    Remember the movie "Dave", PLYMCO_PILGRIM? In one scene, he has to imitate the President, and so he gets his accountant friend in and together they balance the budget.

    IMO, our problems are not all that hard to solve. You and I could doubtless do well together. The problem is human nature. All the senses of entitlement, bellyaching, selfishness, etc.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2010

Share This Page