Letter to the editor:

Welfare cuts: Mean-spirited and misguided

Sam Bowler, Las Vegas

Wed, Jul 23, 2008 (2:05 a.m.)

Regarding the article by Timothy Pratt in Friday’s Las Vegas Sun, “Nevada’s poor will have to tighten belts more if food stamp, welfare cuts OK’d”:

Hacking away at the welfare subsidy to reduce state spending is idiocy and just mean-spirited. What kind of thinking is it to take away more from those who have not? If you live in this country, it is your responsibility to take care of the less fortunate. Many Americans are just one paycheck away from being on welfare. If their job goes south, what might they do to ensure their family’s well-being?

Our governor and lawmakers are too intent on the philosophy of pulling one’s self up by the bootstraps. It becomes awfully hard to do if you don’t have boots to begin with.

Currently, in some families, the only food the children get is the federally funded breakfasts and lunches provided in the schools. They are too proud to go on welfare and their children go without food for supper. Or, those on welfare get such a small amount that families can’t provide much better.

Getting off welfare is ideal, but the truth is society still looks down on the unfortunate and many employers look at a “welfare” history and shy away from hiring these people. Although our current program is not perfect, it would be devastating to the lives of innocent children, the disabled and the infirm if its funds were cut. Take the scissors elsewhere and don’t cut the heart out of the less fortunate.

Discussion: 9 comments so far…

By jfnance32

7/23/08 at 4:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

What is the problem?

Obama ran TV ads where is proud that he lead the charge to kick people off of welfare.

He said that he was a leader behind Clinton's "Kick People Off Welfare" bill.

LOL....he was against the bill but had to vote for it so that the state government would still receive money from the Feds.
By PatriciaLV

7/23/08 at 6:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

Hey, jfnance, do you EVER have anything of any substance to say? Or has AM radio/the GOP blastfax been so burned into whatever serves as your brain that you are completely unable to think on your own?

You need brain welfare.
By JohnF

7/23/08 at 8:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

We make the conscious decision to have a free market economic system (in my opinion a very wise decision). That model assumes unemployment and poverty, no two ways about it.

Since we have made the conscious decision to have both unemployed and poor people we have an obligation to make certain that those people do not starve to death or die of exposure. We also need to make sure that they are not denied the opportunity to make their own way out of poverty (did you hear that, opponents of public education?). That doesn't mean they will, but they need to have the chance.

Feed them, provide them shelter, and provide them an opportunity to improve their lot. Beyond that they're on their own.
By darthbry

7/23/08 at 10:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

It's easy, just eliminate the time people can be on welfare and don't give them incentive to have more children. Also, it is not our responsibility to make sure people who have no intention to better themselves get aid. A conscious choice is made by the individuals, and they should have to deal with the reprecusions of there choices. I choose to go to work, I pay my taxes, I feed my family, and keep them closed. I came from a poor family, but chose to make it out. I do not feel sorry for people who can't hack it due to the personal choices they make. Also, cut any welfare to illegal immigrants. Make them prove citizenship before giving them anything. I bet that would reduce the welfare budget enormously. nothing irritates me more than seeing a person get out of a brand new Cadillac Escalade and using food stamps or wic coupons to buy milk for there kids they are receiving welfare for.
By jfnance32

7/23/08 at 10:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Patricia....good remark...made me laugh.

But Obama is the one who is so proud that the US implemeted his plan that kicks people off welfare.
By KDR81

7/23/08 at 11:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

A free market capitalist system does not imply constant unemployment and poverty. There will not be income equality (which is meaningless) and there won't ever be full employment (also meaningless).

The system we have does not obligate us to create a welfare system, nor does a welfare system guarantee that you actually help poorer members of your community. In fact it is quite possible (as it has already happened here) to encourage further poverty and force the poor to remain impoverished relative to others in your society.

Furthermore, it is neither moral or just to impose a system of obligations where one side is forced to pay for another group. If you believe it is right to help the poor then give them money. Tie their well being to your generosity rather than an entitlement which provides them no incentive to improve their lives on their own.
By JohnF

7/23/08 at 3:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

KDR81,

The fact that there won't ever be full employment is not meaningless. It means that a certain segment of the population will always be unemployed. It won't be the same group constantly as unemployment is both seasonal and regional, but unemployment is omnipresent in our system and we've made the decision that we want it that way. The same is true of income inequality; it is not inconsequential. I am not an egalitarian, we have no obligation to see to it that everyone has the same amount. We do, however, have an obligation to see to it that everyone has enough to survive.

It is moral and just to create "a system of obligations where one side is forced to pay for another" when one side is responsible for the very existence of the other.

I agree with Darthbry that our obligation does not extend to those in this country illegally. I also believe that we are entitled to ask those who receive our largesse to compensate us by providing something of value in return, much like the CCC did during the great depression. But we do have an obligation to make sure our fellow countrymen don't starve.
By azsk8fan

8/4/08 at 7:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Let those who are hungry get a job
Let those who need a roof over their head - ditto
This endless waste of taxpayers dollars to a bunch of lazy, drugged, alcohol ridden BUMS needs to stop!
By pdickins8

8/28/08 at 10:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

Did you know that if you build a $250,000 house on the beach or riverfront, with a magnificent view, you cannot get insurance on it from any commercial insurance company. But the government will pay up to $250,000 to rebuild the house if it is washed away. If you rebuild and it is damaged or washed away again, they will pay again, and again,and again. Build one in an area where you know it will be washed away if you can afford it, rent it, and if it does not rent or it is wasked away, eventually you can't lose, you will get your money back. Wealthy individuals and "corporations" build many such houses and even tracts of such houses for personal or rental reasons. Several hundred million or even billions of dollars are paid out every year for repairs or replacement of such houses, especially after hurricanes in resort areas. This is our taxes being used for welfare, too. THIS is the kind of welfare, for those who don't need it, and who shamelessly and unethically play the system, that I would like to see ended. To take away care for the poor, especially those who DO have jobs but cannot support a family, seems relatively selfish.