These statements, the likes of which I expect we’ll all hear more of in coming months, reinforce three harmful narratives about low-income Americans: People who receive benefits don’t work, they don’t deserve help and the money spent on the social safety net is a waste of money.


1. The first myth, that people who receive public benefits are “takers” rather than “makers,” is flatly untrue for the vast majority of working-age recipients.

Consider Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, formerly known as food stamps, which currently serve about 42 million Americans. At least one adult in more than half of SNAP-recipient households are working. And the average SNAP subsidy is $125 per month, or $1.40 per meal – hardly enough to justify quitting a job.

As for Medicaid, nearly 80 percent of adults receiving Medicaid live in families where someone works, and more than half are working themselves.

2.The second myth is that low-income Americans do not deserve a helping hand.

This idea derives from our belief that the U.S. is a meritocracy where the most deserving rise to the top. Yet where a person ends up on the income ladder is tied to where they started out.

Indeed, America is not nearly as socially mobile as we like to think. Forty percent of Americans born into the bottom-income quintile – the poorest 20 percent – will stay there. And the same “stickiness” exists in the top quintile.

As for people born into the middle class, only 20 percent will ascend to the top quintile in their lifetimes.

3.The third myth is that government assistance is a waste of money and doesn’t accomplish its goals.

In fact, poverty rates would double without the safety net, to say nothing of human suffering. Last year, the safety net lifted 38 million people, including 8 million children, out of poverty.


from http://theconversation.com/3-myths-about-the-poor-that-republicans-are-using-to-support-slashing-us-safety-net-89048

if these people think that government assistance is a waste of money,then WHY do they all have no problem with the government giving HUGE tax breaks,and corporate welfare to HUGE corporations who are successful enough that they dont need it?

and tax breaks to religions?

and tax breaks to people who donate money to political campaigns?


yeah....
thats what i thought!

except most on the right who understand economics are angry governments do this.

We loath bailouts, corporate subsidies, tax breaks for most, I personally believe tax breaks should be given to companies that employs more than 50 people and pays them a living wage.

That is just my opinion.

As in programs that help the poor, I have no issue with helping the poor, Its just the government is lousy at it and they shouldn't be involved as they make a mess of everything they touch.

The American welfare system among other things is broken
You have traditionally Republican governments wanting to slash program to save money, and you have Democrats traditionally pouring money into a broken system, both are wrong.

The reality is not enough people who actually deserves the help gets it and there are people who are abusing the system , we all know someone who is abusing the system and defrauding it and we all know someone who is known as "welfare queen" or knows someone who knows someone who is a welfare queen.

One of the mods shared a great story about a woman he met and was defrauding the system, another poster knowing someone who saved money to go on a cruise.

Its stories like these is why we on the right want to restructure the programs to see if we can eliminate the fraud , or at least reduce it significantly so we can actually help those who really need it and deserve it

It's because too many are using the welfare safety net like a hammock. Sure, some should get it.

Welfare, and disability, should be paid to those who really need it. Being FAT is no reason for getting on disability. Welfare mothers crying about not getting enough money to feed their kids-But they're so fat, they couldn't possibly walk a block without stopping to catch their breath?

Immigrants getting on welfare as soon as they enter the country? NO WAY.

I've been self employed since day one. I'm eligible for ZERO benefits. I will get Medicare at age 65, and Social when I'm 68. That's all. I want money, I go out and work.

I say crack down on these welfare cheats.

Let's talk about that term "work". Even if we take the Obama definition of full time work, that means 30+ hours/week so these people have some income although not enough to live on. Another part of "work" is that government disproportionately penalizes a recipient should their income go over some amount - what should happen is a decrease in benefits but not so much it is a disincentive to an improved income. We need to encourage people to work more and improve their skills so they get a higher income.

bingo oldkid

A major cause of the need for social programs has to do with single parent households. Sometimes these are the result of a divorce and one or both of the parents is a useless deadbeat. Obviously somebody made a stupid choice and now the tax payers are on the hook for supporting the single parent and children. An even worse situation is having children without a partner. Society seems to have accepted that based on the celebrities and some of the shows on TV or the movies. When society glamorizes being a single parent, we have a societal failure.

My basic attitude: it isn't my child, why would you expect me to support it? I supported mine, I think that is a parent's responsibility. If you can't or are unwilling, then you shouldn't be a parent!!

no arguments here oldkid,

and so true.

I have to add something to my original post

I said the American welfare system is broken, I have to add so is the Canadian Welfare system and probably most free speaking countries around the world.

I found out today, if a teen leaves his parents place for whatever reason he or she can get welfare and they will find a place for the little brat to live in?

So if a kid doesn't want obey his parents rules he or she can say adieu mom and dad and live on their own collecting "student welfare"?

how messed up is that?

thank you Liberal government.

2nd and 3rd ( and in cases 4th) generation welfare recipients are not in a " safety net" they have conditioned themselves to abuse a system that was only intended to be a short term " crutch", used until you were back on your feet.

They know full well what they are doing and they have no problem letting other people pay for it.

we have a obligation to help our own who are going thru a rough patch, that is what welfare was designed to do.

But reality is it is abused and misused by people who have no intension of getting off it. They know the " system" and work it.

Here, it Jersey welfare recipients get a debit card each month to purchase food based on the number of people in their household (children.. the more kids.. the more money). The food stamps are supposed to be used for healthy nutritious food for them and especially their kids.

I can not tell you how many times I have stood on line at some corner grocery store as a person with this card piled cookies, potato chips, soda, snacks, cigarettes on the counter. Then paid for it with the food stamp debit card

The local groceries don't care as they are also making money. Big food stores won't risk that but small ones love it.

I have also seen them trying to sell the debit card for much less then face value.. so they can get cash

amen greeneyes

This guy at Honda was selling his foodstamps for 50 cents on a dollar. I still remember his pin. 1965. He inherited a house and sold it. He rented a dumpy trailer with his brother and sis in law. He quit work and lived for 7 years off the money from the house. Some people will always keep themself at the bottom.

WOW that is sad. But these kind of individuals should be made to get a job.
Also lazy single women keep having children without a dad to help support the family.

the food card is intended for GROCERY costs, nowhere does it designate that a food be 'healthy' or non healthy. it is up to the parents with the grocery cost, like any other parent with grocery cost.

If a kid is not ONLY eating junk, who cares if they also have some treats in their home. Seriously.... people, this thread makes me more and more worried about the condition of the human soul .... petty, selfish, heartless, judgmental ... and over children and s the most needy amongst us too


good grief, Jesus wept

hey as long as the welfare mom can go on vacation, who cares what the kids eats right?

As long as they can go to the movies its all good, who cares about the kids nutrition.

right?

I didnt say who cares what they eat. I said AS LONG AS they are not ONLY eating junk, having some snacks as an option is reasonable.

let me ask you this, I dont drink pop (soda as you Americans call it) my parents wouldn't allow pop in the house growing up , and as I got older I didn't drink pop either, we drank water, milk, juice (pure stuff) not Tropicana crap

do you think my parents were cruel by not allowing Pop and certain junk food in the house?