The United States Welfare System: Ruining our Country? Welfare was created in America in the 1930s. Our government saw it as a way to help our country out of The Great Depression. The goal of welfare is to tax the wealthier portion of our society to support the poor. Despite its original goal as a temporary to help us out of an economic hardship, the program has continued to stay active to this day. Over time, more and more people have become dependent on this system. In the United States of America, there are more than 11 million Americans on welfare. Together, these people are collection hundreds of billions of our hard earned money through taxes. Although some people are in favor of Americas current welfare system, this system is detrimental
…show more content…
In many cases, our taxpayers’ hard-earned money is going towards somebody else’s drug or alcohol habits. The most ridiculous aspect in our government’s approach to welfare is that there is no mandatory drug testing. The big controversy over why we should not do mandatory drug testing is that it will cause a rise in tax dollars to make up these tests. While this is true, most people would much rather their taxes be going towards a drug test rather than somebody’s drug addiction. All over America people are cheating this system and it is completely unfair to the working class who is paying their taxes to provide for these people to …show more content…
Many supporters of the welfare system believe that the government should not be in the business of its recipients lives. They believe that receivers of welfare are people too and should not have their privacy invaded. Along with this privacy invasion, they believe that looking into a family could cause racial or situational discrimination in the decision of their government benefits. As said by Sara Faherty in Welfare Reform these people believe that they are being underestimated of the money they are bringing in due to living situations and race (127-136). On the living situation side, the argument is that the government will supply less money to single mothers if there is a so called “step-father” or male figure living with the family. The message shown through this particular argument is that there is no way of telling whether or not this male figure is providing for this family or not since technically, it is not his family. Government investigation is very necessary is this situation because if this male is providing for the family and the “single” mother is collecting welfare, then they are easily taking free money they do not need from the government. The mother is collecting as a single mother when rally she is receiving money on the other hand from a man she is with. A senior at Allegheny College, Naisy Flannery states her opinion in an interview, “I think the ways people are finding
In many cases, our taxpayers’ hard-earned money is going towards somebody else’s drug or alcohol habits. The most ridiculous aspect in our government’s approach to welfare is that there is no mandatory drug testing. The big controversy over why we should not do mandatory drug testing is that it will cause a rise in tax dollars to make up these tests. While this is true, most people would much rather their taxes be going towards a drug test rather than somebody’s drug addiction. All over America people are cheating this system and it is completely unfair to the working class who is paying their taxes to provide for these people to …show more content…
Many supporters of the welfare system believe that the government should not be in the business of its recipients lives. They believe that receivers of welfare are people too and should not have their privacy invaded. Along with this privacy invasion, they believe that looking into a family could cause racial or situational discrimination in the decision of their government benefits. As said by Sara Faherty in Welfare Reform these people believe that they are being underestimated of the money they are bringing in due to living situations and race (127-136). On the living situation side, the argument is that the government will supply less money to single mothers if there is a so called “step-father” or male figure living with the family. The message shown through this particular argument is that there is no way of telling whether or not this male figure is providing for this family or not since technically, it is not his family. Government investigation is very necessary is this situation because if this male is providing for the family and the “single” mother is collecting welfare, then they are easily taking free money they do not need from the government. The mother is collecting as a single mother when rally she is receiving money on the other hand from a man she is with. A senior at Allegheny College, Naisy Flannery states her opinion in an interview, “I think the ways people are finding