Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

With all these welfare questions swirling around.....

Would you support a requirement that welfare recipients work 40 hours per week (with access to daycare) in return for their welfare check?


Asked by Anonymous at 2:36 PM on Jan. 28, 2009 in Money & Work

This question is closed.
Answers (20)
  • I think that there are alot of answers to the issue. I think that they can work or do community service for say 15 hours a week which is only 5 hours a day 3 days a week. They can also then go to college and maybe have that paid for with free daycare. Then they better themselves, get better jobs, help their communities and everyone is happy. It isnt the best system but its better then whats in place now. I believe if you give a man a fish he eats for a day, teach him to fish and he eats everyday. Welfare doesnt teach anyone how to earn a living or better themselves. It simply keeps people down.

    Answer by gemgem at 2:59 PM on Jan. 28, 2009

  • so your saying they hve to work fourty hours a week to get a welfare check am i right?

    Answer by jodi205 at 2:38 PM on Jan. 28, 2009

  • Id support it if the check was equivalent to say min wage. Sure. I think they should have to work for the money but I am unsure based on the amount they get that it would come out to min wage for 40 hours a week. But if they get lets say $500 a month then they should work 20 hours a week.

    Answer by gemgem at 2:40 PM on Jan. 28, 2009

  • No because those people that cant would have to go without.

    Answer by BIMOM21 at 2:41 PM on Jan. 28, 2009

  • There would be no reason theyd go without. Theyd offer free daycare. If they cant physically work then they should be in disability not welfare. And those using their kids as an excuse need to get over it. There are plenty and I mean PLENTY of working moms with special needs kids who do just fine.

    Answer by Anonymous at 2:43 PM on Jan. 28, 2009

  • Hey gem...
    I'm intrigued by this. I don't know that it would necessarily need to be minimum wage b/c we wouldn't want to just be putting people on the public payroll but it would be in effect to work off their debt to society. They could have access to a job bank to find a "real job" and get off the welfare rolls.

    Perhaps they could do jobs "no one would do" that illegals now do!?!

    Or would it become a nightmare for supervisors? I'll have to think about this one....One thing I do know is that the system needs reform, for sure even though Clinton's welfare reform plan helped a lot.

    Answer by MojitoMama at 2:45 PM on Jan. 28, 2009

  • If you CANT work, you should get disability, NOT welfare.

    Answer by customcat2000 at 2:55 PM on Jan. 28, 2009

  • this arguement can go on and on and we'll never reach an agreement.
    there are already requirements to receiving welfare. i don't know what they are because i have not had to use the services before and perhaps there need to be tighter restrictions so that fewer people will abuse the system.
    HOWEVER, make sweeping generalizations about welfare recipients is just wrong. sure, there are people who will abuse and take advantage of just about anything but there are even more who genuinely need help and who are simply going through a rough patch.

    Answer by heatherama at 3:02 PM on Jan. 28, 2009

  • I'd support something that says you must work or be activly *trying* to work. Unfortunately, somoene somehwere will find a way to beat the system.

    Answer by Anonymous at 3:05 PM on Jan. 28, 2009

  • 2:48 you guys are disabled, not on welfare so no worries!

    Answer by Anonymous at 3:06 PM on Jan. 28, 2009