Democrat and Republican liberals alike often excoriate those who think that welfare programs should not be parceled out indiscriminately, but should require something from the recipients. Back when Bill Clinton was fighting impeachment, he actually signed on to a welfare for work program, and amazingly, the welfare roles shrank!
It turns out that if people can get stuff for free, without having to do anything for it, they will. That should not be a surprise. The other thing liberals will have us believe is that welfare recipients have no responsibility for their situation. While that is certainly true in some cases, there are many more that result from poor decisions and behavior.
Starting late last year, North Carolina began requiring drug testing of new applicants for a state welfare program. A number of politicians decried the requirement as unfair, saying that it was too costly, and that it was onerous to those who would be required to take the test. The test was not universal and applied only to one program, but the results were quite surprising.
See test results on page 2:
Todd Brown Not if they are PERMANENTLY barred from receiving any benefits, and if they refuse to provide a decent life for their children, termination of parental rights. Some of these children would be better off in an orphanage, than being raised by their lazy, entitled mothers and fathers.
Todd Brown: No one’s forcing them to take drug tests. But if they want taxpayer money, they have to prove that money is going to take care of the children, not to keep drug pushers happy and in business. If you want to be a druggie, get a job and earn your own money, and let those who go to work everyday and live decent lives keep their own earnings, instead of supporting their bad habits!
no this was just bad journalism.
although,I do believe that there are more productive ways to help improve the welfare system and to stop those from taking advantage of it. i’m just not a fan of attacking those suffering from addiction.
i was never really a fan of our welfare system in general. giving people money with no regulations leaves too much opportunity for them to take advantage of it. that’s like the #1 rule in fraud prevention. Maybe one day our government will get it.
True, the journalism sucks on the article. My appeal was that they were putting some regulation on it. And making it less of a handout. It’s not an easy problem to fix (our welfare system) but I think that standardized rules will help limit the abuse/fraud
Shane Perez ok so crack mom can’t get welfare to feed her kids, now what? seems like it’s harming more people than it’s benefitting. perhaps requiring that recipients of welfare have jobs would probably be better, or giving resources to help w addiction, or even childcare would all be better long-term i think.
more expensive, but poverty is a cycle but so is every other economic status. more people to rise above poverty = less people in the cycle = less money spent in the future helping these people.
About time now they have yo test daycare workers too
They don’t have to prove it’s taking care of the kids …they don’t even check to see if the kids you claim even live there!?aka fraud…this doesn’t stop fraud…and poor ppl can smoke free because ppl share it…hell some actually smoke to keep from taking harsher drugs they can get prescribed for pain…if your going to to it it has to be fair…since a guy who smoked can flunk 3 weeks later refuse all ppl welfare until a waiting period. And test them all every day…cuzz someone may drink a beer! It’s a witch until! And a waste of more money….seems like this is more of an issue of ppl just wanting to inflict punishment on ppl…i personally don’t believe In welfare…but…everyone can’t be me…some need help…they are called children…and they shouldn’t starve or be homeless because some guy was upset about peeing for his job so hes going to take it out on others rather than say screw you to his boss! Which I have done!