Should welfare recipiants have to do community service?

pjhawks wrote:

_ wrote:

pjhawks wrote:

not sure where you live but i'd love to find the place where 'welfare' recipients are working harder than the rest of us. frankly that's just insulting to someone who works 40-60 hours a week, every week. and don't use the excuse that many of them are single mothers or whatever. can't afford children then put a damn condom on.

Yes, it is insulting for someone to think they work harder than someone else who works 40-60 hours a week, every week, isn't it? So then you should understand how insulting this idea is to welfare recipients, many of whom work 40-60 hours a week, every week.

I guess I shouldn't have said many people on welfare already work HARDER than THE REST of us. Your point is taken - many of them work harder than some of us, but some of us (like yourself) work just as hard as many welfare recipients.

so are you trying to say there are welfare recipients working 40-60 hours a week?

Yes.

_ wrote:

so are you trying to say there are welfare recipients working 40-60 hours a week?

Yes.[/quote]

not any where i'm from or around my area. are you in the US? maybe our definition of welfare is different.

pandora wrote:

Hey I already have posted many times the positives and that everyone would do well to experience community service because it is an opportunity not a punishment.

You perhaps might enjoy the positive effects, it would bring some understanding of the benefits.

You would also see where many of us are coming from which is not to find fault
with people but to give them opportunity to be a working part of society. That is a good thing.

I think your seeing this whole debate just from your own POV and not anyone else's. Not everyone thinks like you i'm afraid. You know what? Education and going to University is a great opportunity isn't it? but not everyone embraces that. Some people don't take it as a chance to grow and expand their mind and work out a better future for themselves. Not everyone is going to see or care what they are doing to the community or see it as a opportunity.

I'm going to Africa in the summer to do some volunteer work there, I will get that sense of benefiting the community and the positive effects because it's what I want to do and it's what i'm looking for. Do you think if we forced people to do it they will care? Forcing people into your own thought pattern doesn't work, not in this situation.

I'm not gonna say that this is a rubbish idea but more consideration and thought is needed before we start forcing people into doing things. I imagine some people on welfare could feel disconnected with the rest of the 'community' so anything we can do to bring people back in, so to speak, is a good thing. Forced labour isn't. I just think some people here are a little too quick to push them into this.

Loulou wrote:

But I certainly agree that if you are doing nothing and your able-bodied, bloody oath you should be doing some type of work because let's face it, my husband is paying their way as well as ours.

I agree you should be doing *something* but what that entails and what it should be is under debate. What type of community service are we talking about here?

Don't think these people should do anything completely humiliating, I know some people from Australia help out environmentally with Conservation Corps. I think ultimately, it gets them used to getting up in the morning and out and having that mind-set of working, rather than getting up at 12, sitting there watching T.V. all day and then, when they do get a job, have it be such a dramatic change to their lifestyle that they end up quitting. Not only that but if I was an employer, I would much rather see that the person was doing some kind of activity rather than nothing.

Loulou wrote:

Don't think these people should do anything completely humiliating, I know some people from Australia help out environmentally with Conservation Corps. I think ultimately, it gets them used to getting up in the morning and out and having that mind-set of working, rather than getting up at 12, sitting there watching T.V. all day and then, when they do get a job, have it be such a dramatic change to their lifestyle that they end up quitting. Not only that but if I was an employer, I would much rather see that the person was doing some kind of activity rather than nothing.

Very true. There is saying here in ye olde England, 'Looking for a job is a full time job' and I think thats true. It takes a massive amount of time to properly look for a job, if your doing it correctly and not just a weekly trip down to the job center. Yes being active like doing conservation and volunteer work looks good to employers, it says a lot about that individual and gives him / her an edge getting back employed. If you force everyone to do it then the decent workers could lose that edge.

I ask what kind of 'volunteer' activities because I just wonder whether these are things that could be turned into a paying job. I have been in a position of being unemployed (was only 4 weeks) but it does have a massive pyscological effect and so can being forced to do charity work because your on welfare.

Loulou wrote:

Well in our country, you do get paid to do that work. I mean call at 'assistance' or call it 'dole money' you get paid. I see your point about dividing the decent workers from the slackers but ultimately, an employer won't keep on a slacker forever anyway.
I guess the REAL question is:
If your able-bodied and doing no type of work, why SHOULDN'T you help out your community? :?

Maybe it's different employment laws there but once you hire someone it isn't easy to get rid of them at all.

You are right i guess, why shouldn't you?

Problem is there are far too many people of the mind set of why should I?

Why shouldn't you want to eat healthy? Why would you want to smoke? Why would you take drugs? Why don't you exercise? Why don't you take an evening class? Why don't you help your child out with their homework instead of watching TV? etc. Point is we rarely (as a species) do what we are supposed to do or should do.

I am only talking about the people who are doing NOTHING.
I know it isn't easy these days to get rid of someone who's slack at work but really you just give them a warning, if they fly right after that, sweet, if not, another warning. After that, see you later. It's annoying but can be done. Besides, most jobs have a trial basis to start with now.

I just think it should be:
Be a lazy bugger and sit on your arse=No Money
Or let's face it, we would all do it! Then where the hell will their money come from?)

pandora wrote:

_ wrote:

pjhawks wrote:

not any where i'm from or around my area. are you in the US? maybe our definition of welfare is different.

Yes, I'm in the U.S. and part of my job is to work with Welfare recipients. MANY of them work their asses off at low-paying jobs. Some have TWO FULL-TIME jobs just to make ends meet at minimum wage.

2 fulltime jobs at minimum wage is equal to $10.50 per hour here in Georgia
so how much more do they get in aid or are we talking food stamps?

pandora... you and your husband could not survive on $10.50 per hour without drastic changes to your lifestyle.

minimum wage in georgia is $5.25?
that is a joke...right?