You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

3
1

[–] Beers 3 points 1 point (+4|-3) ago  (edited ago)

Same goes for all physical goods, actually. If someone on welfare is able to buy something physical, valuable, and transferrable, then their spending is not controlled. Stopping cash is one thing, but what happens when their dealer says "just go buy stuff on my shopping list and I'll give you 50 cents on the dollar in drugs"

The amount of effort and the cost of controlling every single aspect of a welfare recipient's life is not worth the benefit. Perhaps we would see a better return on our welfare expenses if we focused on helping, not controlling, the recipients. Give them options and a reason to try and live better, instead of generating conflict. Perhaps that would be more effective?

The goal is to get as many people out of welfare, and into productive lives, right? Or is the goal something along the lines of total control and punishment of the poor for being poor?