Author Topic: Workfare Project Concept  (Read 425 times)

Offline topside

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
  • Gender: Male
  • Work with what is and toward what should be.
Workfare Project Concept
« on: March 02, 2017, 01:25:34 PM »
I've been thinking a little about welfare spending. Looked at a few posts on this site too.

Here is a stat. I found on this from 2016: In FY 2016 total US government spending on welfare — federal, state, and local — was “guesstimated” to be $1,032 billion, including $591 billion for Medicaid, and $467 billion in other welfare.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/welfare_spending

I don't know how reliable the site is - if someone has a better source then let me know. But over 1 Trillion dollars!!! And I'm pretty sure that some of this isn't going to those who cannot work. There are some who truly have needs - some handicapped and physically disabled. But there are a lot of folks that can work and aren't even trying. And most of these will be Dims - so it's time for those who can to step out and work like the rest of us and reduce this expense. Maybe even pay a little (flat) tax when Cruz gets his way with Trump.

Anyway, I'm guessing that this is monies that were distributed to states who then trickle it down to the people in need - and some is probably siphoned off as it trickles down. Since the feds seem to be stuck in getting involved in this, so why not require compliance in showing that those getting the welfare and that can work are working - why not a workfare bill?

I haven't heard Trump moving on this front -  he has so many other initiatives going. Would it be worthwhile to propose an idea for a Bill for someone in the House to consider? If the forum likes the idea then I could try to draft something. Or is there a more important topic we might want to put some energy into? Or is this out of scope for the forum?

What I like about the workfare initiative is that it starts working to move a big constituent of the Dims (IMO); starts moving those living, sometime generationally, on handouts towards working for themselves and contributing. It's about helping the poor by trying to uncover those who abuse the funds. And it would require the states to enact a workshare program and document how the monies are being spent. What I don't like is that the fed shouldn't be tied up in it - the states should be working to take care of their own. But the money is being spent with no end in site, so why not try to gain more for what is being spent?   

The Bill would go something like this: Hey <insert state name here>, you're getting a boatload of money in welfare funds from the fed. To qualify to receive it in 2018, you need to define a workfare program and show evidence that those who can are working to receive the funds. Oh - and the overhead to manage the program needs to come out of state revenue - the funds we give you needs to go to the people demonstrating need - not bureaucrats or overhead functions.

There are holes - more work to be done, but that's the main idea. The primary objective is to reduce waste and fraud. The secondary objective is to start moving the function out of the fed and back to the states. if states find the fed request is too onerous, then the states can just do what they want without the fed - how it should be in the first place.

Thoughts?



Offline walkstall

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23419
  • Gender: Male
  • WYSIWYG
Re: Workfare Project Concept
« Reply #1 on: March 02, 2017, 01:59:27 PM »
After workfare/training, no work no eat.  But then I am a hard ass.   
A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.- James Freeman Clarke

Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession.  I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.  ~ Ronald Reagan ~

Always remember "Feelings Aren't Facts."

Offline Billy's bayonet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Gender: Male
  • Fighting Communism since 1969
Re: Workfare Project Concept
« Reply #2 on: March 02, 2017, 02:08:16 PM »
We had a program like this, instituted by Bill Clinton....at the insistence of the GOp congress. However Obamao did away with it. My thing would be deport the illegals and make welfare able bodied pick up the slack.
Evil operates best when under a disguise

Deplorable and Proud of it

Offline walkstall

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23419
  • Gender: Male
  • WYSIWYG
Re: Workfare Project Concept
« Reply #3 on: March 02, 2017, 02:09:27 PM »
We had a program like this, instituted by Bill Clinton....at the insistence of the GOp congress. However Obamao did away with it. My thing would be deport the illegals and


 :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.- James Freeman Clarke

Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession.  I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.  ~ Ronald Reagan ~

Always remember "Feelings Aren't Facts."

Offline quiller

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17781
  • Gender: Male
  • Reinstate dueling for Congress
Re: Workfare Project Concept
« Reply #4 on: March 02, 2017, 02:23:46 PM »
After workfare/training, no work no eat.  But then I am a hard ass.

What training? Here's your shovel, there's where we want the hole. Dig! We'll be back at lunch. No hole, no lunch --- you dig?

Offline supsalemgr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11045
  • Gender: Male
Re: Workfare Project Concept
« Reply #5 on: March 03, 2017, 04:34:00 AM »
I've been thinking a little about welfare spending. Looked at a few posts on this site too.

Here is a stat. I found on this from 2016: In FY 2016 total US government spending on welfare — federal, state, and local — was “guesstimated” to be $1,032 billion, including $591 billion for Medicaid, and $467 billion in other welfare.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/welfare_spending

I don't know how reliable the site is - if someone has a better source then let me know. But over 1 Trillion dollars!!! And I'm pretty sure that some of this isn't going to those who cannot work. There are some who truly have needs - some handicapped and physically disabled. But there are a lot of folks that can work and aren't even trying. And most of these will be Dims - so it's time for those who can to step out and work like the rest of us and reduce this expense. Maybe even pay a little (flat) tax when Cruz gets his way with Trump.

Anyway, I'm guessing that this is monies that were distributed to states who then trickle it down to the people in need - and some is probably siphoned off as it trickles down. Since the feds seem to be stuck in getting involved in this, so why not require compliance in showing that those getting the welfare and that can work are working - why not a workfare bill?

I haven't heard Trump moving on this front -  he has so many other initiatives going. Would it be worthwhile to propose an idea for a Bill for someone in the House to consider? If the forum likes the idea then I could try to draft something. Or is there a more important topic we might want to put some energy into? Or is this out of scope for the forum?

What I like about the workfare initiative is that it starts working to move a big constituent of the Dims (IMO); starts moving those living, sometime generationally, on handouts towards working for themselves and contributing. It's about helping the poor by trying to uncover those who abuse the funds. And it would require the states to enact a workshare program and document how the monies are being spent. What I don't like is that the fed shouldn't be tied up in it - the states should be working to take care of their own. But the money is being spent with no end in site, so why not try to gain more for what is being spent?   

The Bill would go something like this: Hey <insert state name here>, you're getting a boatload of money in welfare funds from the fed. To qualify to receive it in 2018, you need to define a workfare program and show evidence that those who can are working to receive the funds. Oh - and the overhead to manage the program needs to come out of state revenue - the funds we give you needs to go to the people demonstrating need - not bureaucrats or overhead functions.

There are holes - more work to be done, but that's the main idea. The primary objective is to reduce waste and fraud. The secondary objective is to start moving the function out of the fed and back to the states. if states find the fed request is too onerous, then the states can just do what they want without the fed - how it should be in the first place.

Thoughts?

I believe there is a law in place passed during the Clinton Administration that required a from of workfare. Obama removed the requirement via an EO so it can probably be brought back.
"If you can't run with the big dawgs, stay on the porch!"

 

Powered by EzPortal