patrick.net

tatupu70 says

I just find his conclusion utterly unsupported by his evidence. I agree that we should look at welfare reform, but ending it entirely seems like a case of the solution being worse than the problem.

I agree with you.

CBOEtrader says

Welfare results in a cycle of poverty, broken families, and crime. It has decimated the inner-city black communities–and hurt society overall with increased crime, wealth disparity, and wasted human capital. Over multiple generations, welfare has the exact opposite effect than intended.

Not a very timely point. Most agree which is why Welfare has been decreasing for 35 years. Your link was from before "welfare reform" in 1996 (under Clinton).

General inferences about whether welfare was detrimental as structured 40 years ago, are not really relevant to the level and type of welfare going on today, which I believe is mostly food stamps.

Yes that was based on a quick search, and Wikipedia

Maybe you are time traveling back to the mid 90s and arguing that we should support the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act ?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Responsibility_and_Work_Opportunity_Act

Analyzing recent increases in welfare during our great recession is difficult. Do we even know what the true unemployment rate is ? Isn't it upwards of 20% if you include long term unemployed and extremely underemployed ?

elliemae says

CBOE:
My heart is bleeding (not bleading, nor bleating)

True, also, I highly doubt that Ray lives inside an American.

elliemae says

The American in which rayray lives...

Seriously, typos happen. As proud as you are of the spellchecker in your computer, get over it. It makes you appear petty.

elliemae says

due to - drum roll, please - my being a social worker.

I hope this isn't your topic-expert-trump-card. I had dinner with my girlfriend's coworkers a few days ago. It was a racially diverse group of psychotherapists and social workers. The stories they tell me about the ravages of welfare's unitended consequences on Chicago's African American communities are shocking.

It is common for their impoverished mostly black clients to 1)strategize to have an out-of-wedlock baby (or a second baby) to get welfare--the men these underage women choose to have babies with are often 10 or 15 years older than they are 2)choose not to get a job out of fear of losing benefits, 3)choose not to marry or allow an adult boyfriend to live in their home in fear of losing benefits, 4)engage in criminal and black market activities such as selling drugs or small-time prostitution or trading foodstamps for money at pennies on the dollar--all so that they can supliment their income without losing benefits, 5)use peer pressure to encourage other teenage women in their community to do the same. Most of their clients are second, third, and even forth generation welfare recipients. Welfare is not the entire story, but it plays a leading role in the story.

marcus says

Not a very timely point. Most agree which is why Welfare has been decreasing for 35 years. Your link was from before “welfare reform” in 1996 (under Clinton).
General inferences about whether welfare was detrimental as structured 40 years ago, are not really relevant to the level and type of welfare going on today, which I believe is mostly food stamps.

This is a valid point--and perhaps things have gotten better. As described in my above post though, this issue is still relevant today.

Buchanon says:

What we have accepted today is a vast permanent underclass of scores of millions who cannot cope and must be carried by the rest of society — fed, clothed, housed, tutored, medicated at taxpayer’s expense for their entire lives. We have a new division in America: those who pay a double fare, and those who forever ride free.

It is sad, and it's not simple. Buchanon doesn't talk about prison or wages. He doesn't talk about how his bretheren who are the most appalled by this are also very much against abortion. He says "we" survived the great depression without this kind of support for the poor. So ? Many people in one way or another didn't survive it.

I love it when I see patients who have nicer cellphones, clothes, jewelry than me and a good number of my colleagues. Meanwhile they get free healthcare, food stamps, "disability benefits" for themself and their 5 kids. Oh another one on the way.

Really makes me want to work harder...

CaffeineAddict says

I love it when I see patients who have nicer cellphones, clothes, jewelry than me and a good number of my colleagues. Meanwhile they get free healthcare, food stamps, “disability benefits” for themself and their 5 kids. Oh another one on the way.
Really makes me want to work harder…

Man, you have no idea how great it is to be poor and living on welfare + foodstamps. It comes with these awesome benefits:

- Between the rampant crime and domestic abuse in your neighborhood, you're sure to have excitement filled evenings

- The horrible education that your children receive makes sure that they'll always be with you!

- With incarceration rates more than 10x higher than the gainfully employed, you'll know you will always have a place to sleep.

Really, come off it. Yeah, there are douchebags who waste what little money they do have on stupid things (frequently on credit, mind you), but that is not representative of poverty as a whole. Spend some time in poor neighborhoods and see how it works out for you.

Kevin says

CaffeineAddict says

I love it when I see patients who have nicer cellphones, clothes, jewelry than me and a good number of my colleagues. Meanwhile they get free healthcare, food stamps, “disability benefits” for themself and their 5 kids. Oh another one on the way.

Really makes me want to work harder…

Man, you have no idea how great it is to be poor and living on welfare + foodstamps. It comes with these awesome benefits:
- Between the rampant crime and domestic abuse in your neighborhood, you’re sure to have excitement filled evenings
- The horrible education that your children receive makes sure that they’ll always be with you!
- With incarceration rates more than 10x higher than the gainfully employed, you’ll know you will always have a place to sleep.
Really, come off it. Yeah, there are douchebags who waste what little money they do have on stupid things (frequently on credit, mind you), but that is not representative of poverty as a whole. Spend some time in poor neighborhoods and see how it works out for you.

I'm glad you assumed that I'm a "typical conservative" that hates poor people and "don't know what it's like."

Well I grew up in a single parent household. I lived far below the poverty level. Mom refused to take government hand-outs because she didn't like the idea of being dependent on others. She worked her ass off. My siblings and I worked. A lot of times we didn't have enough to EAT. (on hindsight, we should have been mooches and leeched off government cheese...but then maybe it wouldn't have fostered work ethic)

I lived in a "ghetto neighborhood" where most of my neighbors were poor or on Section 8 housing. There was crime everywhere.

So yes I know EXACTLY what it's like to live in a poor neighborhood, grow up poor. But America is great in that if you work hard enough, ANYONE can TRULY become successful and move up the economic ladder.

Personally I am sick of liberals assuming that "oh it's so horrible to be poor, they can't help it and can't dig themselves out with nonstop handouts." I think nonstop handouts PROMOTE the behaviors that keep them poor.

Oh calm down.

CaffeineAddict says

So yes I know EXACTLY what it’s like to live in a poor neighborhood, grow up poor. But America is great in that if you work hard enough, ANYONE can TRULY become successful and move up the economic ladder.

Ah, this old line. Sorry, but it just isn't the case, or at least not the case any more than it is in just about any other country. America is not special in this regard, and that's not really the point here. The point is that being poor sucks, and the idea that you "wonder why you work so hard" is amusing.

Shit, it's contradictory. If you "work so hard", why aren't you way ahead of these people? I mean, why don't you have an expensive cell phone and clothes and whatnot? Maybe you just don't work hard enough? Or maybe, just maybe, those people are simply making shitty financial decisions, and it has very little to do with welfare.

Personally I am sick of liberals assuming that “oh it’s so horrible to be poor, they can’t help it and can’t dig themselves out with nonstop handouts.” I think nonstop handouts PROMOTE the behaviors that keep them poor.

Well, it is horrible to be poor, and most people can't really get out of it. If you don't get a solid education and have good role models as a child, your chances of success as an adult are slim to none. Poor begets poor, ignorance begets ignorance.

I'm not claiming in any way that "nonstop handouts" are the key here, but I am saying that people who say things like "really makes me want to work harder..." (implying that people who don't work as hard as they do have a better life) are full of shit. You would never in a million years trade your life for the one that those expensive cell phone sporting, expensive clothes wearing, probably hasn't actually owned anything not bought on credit in 5 years people are living.

It's not so black and white as "people who sponge off the system" and "hard working, honest people".

CaffeineAddict says

I’m glad you assumed that I’m a “typical conservative” that hates poor people and “don’t know what it’s like.”
Well I grew up in a single parent household. I lived far below the poverty level. Mom refused to take government hand-outs because she didn’t like the idea of being dependent on others. She worked her ass off. My siblings and I worked. A lot of times we didn’t have enough to EAT. (on hindsight, we should have been mooches and leeched off government cheese…but then maybe it wouldn’t have fostered work ethic)
I lived in a “ghetto neighborhood” where most of my neighbors were poor or on Section 8 housing. There was crime everywhere.
So yes I know EXACTLY what it’s like to live in a poor neighborhood, grow up poor. But America is great in that if you work hard enough, ANYONE can TRULY become successful and move up the economic ladder.
Personally I am sick of liberals assuming that “oh it’s so horrible to be poor, they can’t help it and can’t dig themselves out with nonstop handouts.” I think nonstop handouts PROMOTE the behaviors that keep them poor.

A GREAT post that deserves to be read over and over again.

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. My reading of history convinces me that most bad government has grown out of too much government."

Thomas Jefferson

CBOEtrader says

Seriously, typos happen. As proud as you are of the spellchecker in your computer, get over it. It makes you appear petty.

I am my own spell checker, and I am proud of my ability to communicate effectively with the written word. I worked very hard to learn this skill and appreciate that you mistook my (mostly) correct grammar and spellling as computer generated. I shall count you as one of my biggest fans.

Come to think of it, I believe that rayray inhabits the persona of what he believes to be a model American - rendering my statement correct in that context.

CBOEtrader says

...Welfare is not the entire story, but it plays a leading role in the story.

Yea, I've heard this before. I've seen my share of people who have no desire to change. I've also seen my share of people who do desire to change. The lifestyle funded by welfare programs ain't pretty, and while some people are institutionalized to it, others choose not to be. I was poor and disabled and decided to change my life (and made some major sacrifices to do so). I've never drawn food stamps nor have I ever received a welfare check. I'm not special, I just wanted it. But when you refer to my bleeding heart, I shall mention that my profession lends itself to such an attitude.

CaffeineAddict says

So yes I know EXACTLY what it’s like to live in a poor neighborhood, grow up poor. But America is great in that if you work hard enough, ANYONE can TRULY become successful and move up the economic ladder.

Personally I am sick of liberals assuming that “oh it’s so horrible to be poor, they can’t help it and can’t dig themselves out with nonstop handouts.” I think nonstop handouts PROMOTE the behaviors that keep them poor.

Many people have a difficult time climbing out of poverty. It's not just liberals who make this assumption.

So far as comparing other's lifestyle choices, such as clothing, cellphones, jewelry, etc to yours - well, you've got a lot of time on your hands.

"Give a Man a Fish, Feed Him For a Day. Teach a Man to Fish, Feed Him For a Lifetime."

Lao Tzu

Note to Liberals: I've been quoting the Founders, along with Ike, FDR, etc. Lau Tzu is not a Founding Father. I hope this fact helps to clear up at least some of your confusion.

This dude named Jesus once fed a hungry multitude with a few loaves of bread and fish. I don't recall him lecturing them on that occasion about how they all absolutely deserved to starve.

I'll break this down for the Duck Dude with the lost hope that he just might get it:

GIVE a person a fish and he will DEPEND on the GIFT in order to eat on a daily basis.

TEACH a person to fish (a SKILL to be applied to HELP HIMSELF SURVIVE) and THAT SKILL will feed him and provide for his entire lifetime.

This discourse should (but it probably won't) prove to you why virtually no one takes what you say seriously.

I wonder how many people on here commenting about food stamps, know anything about the matter personally or at least second-hand. I see a lot of "welfare queen" sort of comments which are just not fair. There's a lot of people out there that are scrambling on the edge of eviction or foreclosure and the program keeps them from making the choice between food OR having a roof over their heads. By and large, being on food stamps is not a "life choice" it's a stopgap until people do find some way to earn a living. Even some in the military draw food stamps.

CBOEtrader says

The government should focus its efforts on trade schools for the majority, instead of trying to send every American student to a cookie-cutter crap public university. University education should be used to educate the scholarly minority. In fact, we should copy the German system of splitting students into the college bound and trade school bound groups at the age of 12. The trade school kids still must get a higher education, but it will have a focus on baking, or a mechanical trade, or whatever. The German people take great pride in teaching their youth the skills necessary to work as a tradesman, for good reason. Only around 12% go on to an American style University.
As far as handouts to the poor, we should feel comfortable to give (healthy) food to the poor. I have no issue with helping someone eat, as long as its food staples and not potato chips and coke. If an able bodied person requires government housing, I think we should give that to them as well, in exchange for working simple manual labor jobs for the local government 2 to 3 days per week. If they want government healthcare as well, they get to work anther day per week. Perhaps we could allow these people to enter into government sponsored jobs training–with minimum performance requirements. If someone needs extra money for a child, that child should be held to minimum grade standards. We should basically make sure that anyone on the public dole is trying to better themselves and their lot in life.
Simply giving people everything, without requiring anything in return is a horrendous system.
If someone pays unemployment insurance, they should recieve unemployment benefits for some period of time without any work or education requirements.

A perfectly reasonable plan, but the Democrats & Republicrats will never support it. Why? It would damage them politically because so much of the Liberal/Moderate base is made up of people (voters) that have their hand out.

CBOEtrader says

The government should focus its efforts on trade schools for the majority, instead of trying to send every American student to a cookie-cutter crap public university. University education should be used to educate the scholarly minority.

I don't see that it's governments choice. The system has built up around an elementary and secondary system that doesn't do well enough, for spoiled american kids who feel entitled, and who often continue adolescence well into their 20s (at least). My point being that solutions to this can't come from government.

Often times, a couple years in a junior college or in one of the public universities you refer to, can bring an underachieving kid up to the level where they deserve the option of continuing toward a college degree or if they so choose they can work toward a trade of some kind.

We probably could do better in with training for trades, but it's not that bad. And some trade type jobs such as becoming a nurse, or other type of health technician, or law enforcement work, and others, are all areas in which we do fairly well.

It's a market, and it works. Our market for job training which includes various forms of higher education has adapted to the needs of american kids, including the fact that american kids are spoiled and often have a prolonged youth.

The "solution" that I would like to see is if mating and even dating decisions were more heavily skewed toward a person's potential to provide. This is a cultural thing, and my hope is that eventually it will be that way in American culture. That is, if the prevailing perception of sexiest attribute for a potential mate was having a high aptitude, and a high potential future income, and a desire to raise like minded children, then the entire education problem would be gone within a few generations.

What makes you think I can't have all that stuff?

I can pay for all that if I wanted to, however I choose to live frugally, pay down my student debts, save for my future retirement.

Of course, I am going to be punished for my choices of living responsibly by having my taxes increased because when I am attending, I "make too much money!!!!!!" despite my 20+ years of sacrifice and frugality...

It's painfully obvious our nation supports sloth and spending, and punishes sacrifice, work, and saving - just look at our federal income tax!

I personally think we society SHOULD help the poor some. I know I probably would have eaten much better as a kid!

But it shouldn't be through food stamps. WAY too much fraud for that. I remember easily being able to buy food stamps in my neighborhood in a 7:10 ratio through middle-men - who knows what the food stamp recepients were selling it for? (for cigarettes, alcohol, drugs I'm sure)

They should open food banks where people can come in for some food in exchange for some labor - even if it's something as small as cleaning up the parks, streets, etc.

This may be somewhat offtopic and more of a rant than anything:
This probably sounds rather "cruel" but I personally have a huge hatred for single moms who KEEP pumping out kids. I think if welfare single-moms are getting free healthcare, welfare they should be:
1) encouraged, educated, and given free contraceptive (which we do but they refuse anyway)
2) be forced to take Depo shots every 3 months for birth control. (which we offer free but they refuse anyway)
I know it's a touchy subject, but a mom with 5 kids with 4 different dads (I've seen so many of these) really shouldn't be having MORE kids. They're not doing themselves a favor. They're not doing their current kids a favor by splitting the attention. They're certainly not doing the tax payer any favors.
If they don't want to stop having kids, then their free support is cut off. That's their choice to make.

CaffeineAddict says

But it shouldn’t be through food stamps. WAY too much fraud for that. I remember easily being able to buy food stamps in my neighborhood in a 7:10 ratio through middle-men - who knows what the food stamp recepients were selling it for? (for cigarettes, alcohol, drugs I’m sure)

WIC is pretty difficult to defraud these days, now that everything is done on cards. The only scam that I'm aware of that is effective goes something like this:

- Low income but not on WIC person A wants to stretch her dollar.
- She finds someone who is on WIC
- Person on WIC buys groceries for Low income person
- Low income person gives the on WIC person somewhere between 25 and 50 cents for every dollar's worth of food purchased.

That's pretty uncommon though.

Mostly the crack heads and the like just suck dicks, sell drugs, or steal to make extra money.

The "baby daddy" cycle is pretty common though. The reason these women do it is because they tend to be all of the following:

- Uneducated (high school drop outs if they're lucky)
- Depressed (low self esteem causes them to seek out a man's attention)
- Addicted (to crack, meth, or alcohol at least)
- Religious (no abortion, frequently no birth control)

If a poor woman has her first child before the age of 21, the odds are pretty good that she'll remain poor for her entire life.

There is no good solution for the problem that is also realistic. Good luck trying to "force" people to do anything.

CaffeineAddict says

1) encouraged, educated, and given free contraceptive (which we do but they refuse anyway)
2) be forced to take Depo shots every 3 months for birth control. (which we offer free but they refuse anyway)

Sorry, wrong answer. They aren't having kids because they fail to see the value in birth control. They have kids because it's the only thing they can achieve (from their perspective) of value in life. Perhaps we should force people with genetic diseases to get Depo shots as well? Where does this end? How about giving granny a pill instead of the hip replacement (this is Obama's idea not mine)? How about we develop tests for expensive diseases and force women to have abortions to reduce the cost of health care? The extreme low value placed on life is the real problem. These are real people with real problems and the only solution you have is to limit their biological capacity to reproduce? How about raising the standard of living for these people instead of exterminating them? People constantly argue about taking away social services (the extreme right) or forced extinction (the extreme left) of those they don't see productive. How kind of both of you!

Zlxr ... very intelligent post. There is no doubt regarding the fact that an awful lot of people know how to "work the system." IMO, liberalism believes "everyone" is a good person (except of course those evil conservatives). Undoubtedly, there are many people that need and deserve to be helped. No one is arguing that these people should be left behind. But to reward people through government aid for doing nothing is creating fraud. I see no problem whatsoever with requiring recipients of government aid to do some public service in order to earn it while they are on the program. That alone will effectively eliminate much of the fraud that is so rampant.

CaffeineAddict says

It’s painfully obvious our nation supports sloth and spending, and punishes sacrifice, work, and saving - just look at our federal income tax!

Keep drinking that coffee, it's helping you think. You're making a lot of sense.

I've been reading up on David Stockman recently.

In an Atlantic Monthly December 1981 article he admitted that the 1981 tax cut "was always a Trojan horse to bring down the top [tax] rate" for the wealthy. Cutting taxes for the rich had long ago been coined "trickle down economics" - and it was an unpopular concept with the middle class. "It's kind of hard to sell 'trickle down,'" Stockman told the interviewer. "So the supply-side formula was the only way to get a tax policy that was really 'trickle down.' Supply-side is 'trickle-down' theory."

So the difference between the two is marketing. They repackaged the poop sandwich and we gobbled it up.

You make some good points Ray. You should go back to 1996 and help Clinton pass "The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996."

Clinton wasn't all bad IMO. A lot of "conservatives" hate him and me too when I point out to them that when it came to fiscal responsibility, Clinton made Bush look like the liberal he really was.

Zzyzzx, you are completely right, responsible people will do what it takes to provide for their children. The problem is that America's "safety net" has become a comfortable hammock. The Chinese save 35-40% of their income BECAUSE there is no government safety net. Now, what would call that??? Wait, it's coming to me...I know!! Its called personal responsibility.

Personal responsibility is something the US government doesn't want people to have. The more people took care of themselves, the more apparent it would become that big, massive, bloated government isn't necessary to the degree that it is today. In other words, government would lose power and control over the people. (Before you libs go nuts you'll notice I didn't say eliminate the safety net). After all, how was it that Americas survived before big government ????

canada has far more generous welfare than the US. we give housing to single moms, we wouldn't shame them with food stamps. all the basic nessecities of life really, and we have generally the same employment rate as the US most of the time, a better one at the moment so the crap about promoting dependency is rediculous. There simply arent jobs for everyone, one in 10 people working or looking for work are shit out of luck, through no fault of thier own IMO. If everyone in the US had college degrees right now that fact would remain

Honest Abe says

The Chinese save 35-40% of their income BECAUSE there is no government safety net.

Are you really that ignorant? Do you really know that little about China's welfare system (hey, why don't elderly chinese people have any savings?)

Honest Abe says

Now, what would call that??? Wait, it’s coming to me…I know!! Its called personal responsibility.

No, actually you'd call it socialism.

It's amazing what a country can do when the state owns more than half of the economy.

Once upon a time there was a beautiful Island and 10 people. Each of them fished just enough to feed themselves. Then they elected a "president". Now 9 people had to support 10. Then they decided they needed a "vice-president". Now 8 people had to support 10. The people decided they needed a senator. Now 7 people had to support 10. The burden on the workers continued to grow. The people were becoming impoverished. Pretty soon 5 people had to support 10. In other words the 5 who fished had to give up 50% of their catch to support their government. Soon 4 were supporting 10. Now each worker was beginning to become frustrated and told their government " DO SOMETHING". Government responded by hiring another of the fisherman in order to give out "food stamps". Now 3 fishermen had to support 10, but in return become dependent upon government support. They each got to eat 3/10's of their catch and government contirbuted and additional 1/10th. The remaining 3 fisherman were hungry all the time now, even though they worked full time. Does anyone other that Ray (MR.) America understand the analogy?

Honest Abe says

Does anyone other that Ray (MR.) America understand the analogy?

Why don't the two of you get a room? Narcisstic romance doesn't look so pretty out in the sunlight.

Honest Abe says

Once upon a time there was a beautiful Island and 10 people. Each of them fished just enough to feed themselves. Then they elected a “president”. Now 9 people had to support 10. Then they decided they needed a “vice-president”. Now 8 people had to support 10. The people decided they needed a senator. Now 7 people had to support 10. The burden on the workers continued to grow. The people were becoming impoverished. Pretty soon 5 people had to support 10. In other words the 5 who fished had to give up 50% of their catch to support their government. Soon 4 were supporting 10. Now each worker was beginning to become frustrated and told their government ” DO SOMETHING”. Government responded by hiring another of the fisherman in order to give out “food stamps”. Now 3 fishermen had to support 10, but in return become dependent upon government support. They each got to eat 3/10’s of their catch and government contirbuted and additional 1/10th. The remaining 3 fisherman were hungry all the time now, even though they worked full time. Does anyone other that Ray (MR.) America understand the analogy?

I'm pretty sure that anyone over the age of 10 would get the analogy.

Too bad it's a terrible one.

Honest Abe says

Does anyone other that Ray (MR.) America understand the analogy?

Why not just call him sir, or Captain America? Following him blindly, hanging on his every word... you seem to seek his approval and the way that you stroke each other is kinda creepy. What happens (on that wonderful day) when he leaves this forum for one filled with like-minded people rather than the smattering few of you that lurks here now? I can just imagine your dismay...

O CAPTAIN! my Captain! our fearful trip is done;
The ship has weather’d every rack, the prize we sought is won;
The port is near, the bells I hear, the people all exulting,
While follow eyes the steady keel, the vessel grim and daring:
But O heart! heart! heart!
O the bleeding drops of red,
Where on the deck my Captain lies,
Fallen cold and dead.

Honest Abe says

Once upon a time there was a beautiful Island and 10 people

On your island, the president, vp, senator and the others don't appear to have jobs. Kind of a sucky fantasy island you have, abeabe.

Abe .... they just don't get it.

RayAmerica says

Abe …. they just don’t get it.

This quote is worthy of the patnet hall of fame.