“We want these individuals to get a good job and live the American dream, not just be dependent on the federal government.”
So do I but you can’t raise a family on $10 an hour and that is the kind of jobs that we have now. You can’t even raise a family on $20 an hour.
I’m against the perpetual dole but we have this all or nothing thing going. If we don’t have decent jobs that can provide a living wage for honest work we have failed. I don’t mind a hand up for people who are working but I am all against perpetual handouts for able people. I see lots of trash and things that need done to help out the rest of us while we help others who are at least doing something.
And I have no problem with transitional benifits for those folk.
Disagree.
Are you saying that welfare pays more than $20 an hour?
People in my grandparents time lived TWO FAMILIES in a place the size of a two car garage.
Shrink down the areas or combine with others to afford a non-shelter home and all is better.
Many have not even the skill to show up every day on time for work, so we should all pay to help shelve these people with high wages and benefits or pay? Hell no, I bet many deserve less than minimum wage due to a total lack of self development.
The natural way it’s suppose to work - without the ‘benefit’ of government - is each class works for ‘each other’ AND the class above it.
Those of us in the middle class make our money providing services for each other AND for the class above us. Welfare destroys the process where the poor assist each other - and where they assist the middle class. It’s one more way ‘the elites’ screwed over everyone in the country - EXCEPT themselves.
I wish there was a way to STOP all jobs that provide services and comfort to the upper classes - - especially those clustered around Washington DC. They lack empathy for anyone besides themselves - - AND the criminal classes that keep them in power.
Livable wage has krept into the lexicon. Who is going to pay for that? Should the government decide a minimum? Why not a maximum?
I once was in a situation where there was 4 generations in one house all pn some form of welfare, does this go on forever?
Your point is valid, people need to be motivated to improve their lot in life, there are more reasons not to at this time.
NO work to be found at all.
You shouldn't be having children if you can't get a job that pays enough to support them.
There are jobs out there but you won't get them if you're covered with tats and piercings, you have few skills, your pants are hanging down and you don't speak understandable English.
We started working minimum wage jobs while teens, but worked our way up.
We stayed in school and many got post-graduate degrees.
We delayed having children until we were married and could afford to house and feed them.
We didn’t gamble, drink to excess, or get addicted to drugs.
What is so difficult about these things?
If there are no consequences for living irresponsibly, then people will live irresponsibly. And the irresponsible living will perpetuate itself from generation to generation.
The cycle has to be broken, even if there have to be transitional programs in the near future.
In the past people have taken on two or three jobs to make ends meet. People can do that today, too. I see help wanted signs all over. They may not be great jobs, but they’re available. We should stop allowing people to sit idly on their fellow taxpayer’s dime. It may be harsh, but it would encourage them to make an effort for themselves.
We need to quit expecting our children to grow up and move out at 18-23 and have a lifestyle of success. Multigenerational homes are the key to success in the current climate. That doesn’t include enabling children not to grow up and not to contribute. I don’t know why we expect people to live so separated these days. It used to take time to build success but now the boomers changed the narrative to GTFO and fend for your success with debt as a measure of independence and success.