The problem with the argument against welfare is that it assumes everyone who isn't working is lazy.
I think it's a little more complicated than that.
In Nebraska, most ppl who receive assistance are white and have at least one job. Just that their job does not pay a living wage
No I do not agree for a different reason. You are placing those against welfare in a false category. I am against welfare because i believe it can hold people down in poverty and sometimes occurs for more then one generation.
I do also believe that there are those (not everyone) who are easily complacent, and would rather look for government institutions to solve their problems, when the government is the rio cause if their problem.
It assumes people don't have a right to have money
That's not the argument I would make.
Many, a lot, a significant % but not everybody.
Yes, the lazy ruin it for the people who need it.
I think more people would approve of welfare if it were run better. There are so many welfare cheats, that it tarnishes the program.
Some LIVE on welfare for many years. That is total bullshit.
There should be a limit on how many months you can be on welfare and your amount per child should go down as you have more children. 1-10 2-18 3-25 4-30
To some, the argument against welfare is that it, in many cases, doesn't work as the safety net it was intended to be. I don't think that their are many that everyone on it is lazy.