Budget plan could doom CalWORKS aid to families, children
 

[URL="http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/1917387.html"]Budget plan could doom CalWORKS aid to families, children[/URL]

[QUOTE]Could California become the first state in the nation to do away with welfare?

That doomsday scenario is on the table as lawmakers wrestle with a staggering $24.3 billion budget deficit.

County welfare directors are "in shock" at the very idea of getting rid of CalWORKs, which has been widely viewed as one of the most successful social programs in the state's history, said Bruce Wagstaff, director of the Department of Human Assistance in Sacramento.

"It's difficult to come up with the right adjective to react to this," Wagstaff said. "It would be devastating to the people we serve."

[/QUOTE]

A response to the article:

[QUOTE]I'm all for time limits on public assistance for families and for cutting general assistance to individuals. Some commentors here wonder what will happen to the recipients. My answer to them would be: hopefully they will get their acts together and either get jobs or enroll in college or trade schools like the rest of us did. Why is the responsibility of the taxpayer to support those people and their children. What happened to personal responsibility? Public assistance is a program designed to be temporary support for families until they can "get on their feet." It was not designed to be a way of life or a permanent source of income at taxpayer expense.
[/QUOTE]

I'm all for short term welfare...but the fact is I hear WAAAY too many stories of families living for YEARS off of my money. Sorry, but everyone needs some help, yes, but not life support.

****.
That.
****.

[QUOTE]In Sacramento County, 33,500 families receive CalWORKs benefits, including more than 62,000 children, Wagstaff said. A family of three gets a monthly check of $689, plus food stamps. But CalWORKs does more than simply issue checks, he pointed out. [B]It helps people, many of whom have depended on public assistance for years,[/B] learn new skills and get jobs, with subsidies for child care.

[/QUOTE]

They don't need to get rid of it. They just need to implement a drug testing requirement for assistance.

[QUOTE=ryball;2634030]They don't need to get rid of it. They just need to implement a drug testing requirement for assistance.[/QUOTE]

That, or some other form of enforcement and control.

The people who really need short term welfare shouldn't get screwed over because of other dickheads who have generations of family all milking the welfare train.

However, if the state needs this to balance the budget, then they better be looking at their own payrolls and state paid expenses before they cut welfare altogether.

"It helps people, many of whom have depended on public assistance for years, learn new skills and get jobs, with subsidies for child care."

if they aint working, why teh **** do they need child care?

[QUOTE=RussB;2634199]"It helps people, many of whom have depended on public assistance for years, learn new skills and get jobs, with subsidies for child care."

if they aint working, why teh **** do they need child care?[/QUOTE]

How many kids can you support on a minimum wage job?

Which begs the question - why are they having kids?

[QUOTE=R-Dub;2634582]Which begs the question - why are they having kids?[/QUOTE]

Well, if you're going to try to argue that, you should instead beg the question "[i]When[/i] did they have kids."

I agree CalWORKS needs to be kept alive, but they need to enforce a time limit to avoid abuse of the system.

[QUOTE=R-Dub;2634582]Which begs the question - why are they having kids?[/QUOTE]

Bad things happen to good people. Plenty of people that I know were bank rollin for a while in their lives and then things when south for any number of reasons (divorce, injuries, law suites, etc.)

But the majority of participants are habitual losers.

[QUOTE=Superglue WRX;2634294]How many kids can you support on a minimum wage job?[/QUOTE]

i honestly have no idea since i haven't had a minimum wage job since i was 15.

[QUOTE=ryball;2634030]They don't need to get rid of it. They just need to implement a drug testing requirement for assistance.[/QUOTE]

or require them to take birth control

[QUOTE=Paul@dbtuned;2634870]But the majority of participants are habitual losers.[/QUOTE]

sounds like your customers. POW!



...oh wait....

[QUOTE=irrational x;2634878]sounds like your customers. POW!



...oh wait....[/QUOTE]

backfire.