Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Turning down welfare

If people are offered assistance, and they don't accept, is it a problem?

An article from Brookings Institute points out that the uptake of food stamps (SNAP) and the earned income tax credit (EITC) among those eligible is nowhere near 100 percent.

There are still millions of Americans not claiming benefits they are entitled to

 The authors speculate on the reasons why. For instance, assistance is too difficult to claim, or too far away. They didn't consider pride or stubborn independence, or an actual lack of need because incomes can be misreported. Then they canvas how much lower poverty rates would be if people took what was available and suggest ways to improve participation rates in these programmes.

Really? More welfare is the answer?

When I was a volunteer one supervisor would always start out with a struggling family with a 'make sure they are getting all their entitlements' strategy. My own observations of unkempt and chaotic homes containing unkempt and chaotic people and their unkempt and chaotic relationships immediately told me the problems were deeper seated than a lack of resources. They weren't universally hopeless, but they were universally on welfare.

Entitlements aren't the solution. They are the problem.


gravedodger said...

That Lindsay is the nub of the essential driver of the socialist vote bait.
Bribes are rather wasted if recipients are not participating or have no certainty as to who donated.

Anonymous said...

Entitlements aren't the solution. They are the problem.

The solution is to stop "entitlements".

JC said...

One good reason for not accepting entitlements is it may invite a closer inspection of the sources of income going into the house.


Anonymous said...

The Government missed a golden opportunity in the last budget to get to the bottom of the problems of some of those beneficiary dependents. Instead of an across the board $25/week grant to those who had children, they should have started a budget advisory scheme, and $25 MAY have been made available to families that registered and participated. That way, only those that demonstrated they needed extra could have got it, and that would be after a qualified adviser had sorted out their real underlying problems (HP, fines, power debt, tithing, family support overseas, drugs, alcohol, smoking etc. etc.) I know many of those who are floundering and not coping at present would have benefited MORE from budgetary assistance than just a hand out, and that would have been a better investment for them AND the taxpayers. So next year, will it just be another top-up and continuation of the cycle into more poverty?