Friday, December 30, 2016

WELFARE CULTURE Thinking about myths






The article named above was shared by my friend, Donna Washburn. It caught my eye because several people offered comments of support.

The author, Danica Johnson, offers some insights into the US welfare system that are probably not known to many. Unfortunately, some of her comments have a slant that could prove off-putting to some as noted by another friend, Brandon Schmidly. Johnson's ideas are worth examining with a critical eye—at least by those of us who care more about understanding our world and helping people in need than we care about advocating for one political agenda or another.

1. As noted, welfare is not one program but a general term for a group of programs designed to meet the needs of people with different needs that cannot be met in other ways such as employment or relying on a family or church for support.

This is important. Criticizing welfare makes no sense. Criticizing a specific program or components of a program might make sense. And it matters what you include under the label welfare. For example, working Americans pay into social security. Collecting social security when you become too disabled or reach retirement age is not the same kind of assistance as that which comes from programs designed to help people who have never worked because they too young or because the wages they earn are not enough to cover expenses.

Also, as noted, some programs support the working poor. Try to live on minimum wage as a family of one parent and three children. It’s pretty hard to make it financially, let alone cope with the emotional stress of parenting. Not every parent can go to college and obtain a degree that leads to higher paying work.

2. The myth of laziness is a good one to mention because it is a common insult levied against people who do not work but accept government support. There is little doubt that some people get by with as little as they can in life. There are people who take advantage of others, including taxpayers. Some get caught and some don’t.

If you work or attend school, you know there are people who don’t do their fair share but seem to get by. Perhaps they are lazy- but perhaps not. But to believe that most people who get some sort of government help are lazy is ridiculous, as the author illustrates. Besides, how exactly do you define laziness? How can you tell what a person can or cannot do?

3. There is a problem with undocumented immigrants. Some place a burden on some community resources. Some are children who had no choice in coming to America. Some were victims of deceitful scams. Some work hard, do jobs many citizens do not want, and some pay taxes. As noted, by Johnson, some get emergency medical care. Americans are often the beneficiaries of their hard labor.

4. The myth of high substance dependence among those on government programs deserves a careful look. Substance abuse is a problem for many people regardless of their use of government programs. Some people receiving government support have substance use problems that make matters worse for them. But it does not mean that if they stopped using a substance they would be healthy and able to earn a living. Some might be able to work but some will be disabled for life regardless of using or not using a substance.

5. The myth of the welfare queen from Chicago is a damning image. Setting up a false image to garner support for cutting services to the poor is appalling and antichristian. Confronting people who defraud taxpayers is important to a just society. We won’t catch them all but we do need to fund fraud units. Keep in mind that some folks who cheat tax payers run corporations and serve themselves as public “nonservants” in government positions.

6. The effectiveness of welfare programs should always be a matter of concern. Some programs keep people alive. Some help the poor obtain skills that allow them to earn a living. Some help people maintain employment. Some programs probably have minimal effects or may even produce harmful effects.

It’s important to evaluate programs and make wise decisions. Let the data drive decisions rather than politics. And keep in mind that we should critically evaluate all expenditures of tax-payer money. We need watchful eyes examining military expenditures, the high cost of homeland security, people who bill us (tax-payers) via the government for health, medicine, and education. And of course, not all people who take tax-payer funds to pay rent and buy food are playing fair.

7. Even if you never need government assistance, chances are someone you care about will. Attitudes matter. What’s the point of making people feel bad about getting help? Rarely do we know all the details of a person’s life that accounts for their lack of resources.

And why not give our fellow citizens some credit for assessing the needs of those who seek help? The people in our government agencies serve all Americans. They may make mistakes like everyone else. But I’ve worked with many counselors and social workers for years and find so many try to make the right decision. They don’t like scammers any more than the rest of us. Some are burned out. Most try to do what’s right.

Some of our agency workers go out of their way to raise funds from their fellow co-workers to help a family in need—beyond the small payments they may get from government. I’ve seen government workers collect funds to purchase gasoline for patients who needed out-of-town cancer treatment. I’ve seen them collect donations to buy clothes and necessities for a family who lost all in a house fire. I’ve seen them pile up toys and clothes for poor families at Christmas time. Do you think they would part with their meager government salaries to help people who really didn’t need help?

The author of the article didn’t address religion. But I will. What does your faith teach about caring for the poor? I’ve heard Christians tell me they don’t support government programs because they want Christian programs to provide services. That might be a good idea if Christians could cooperate and meet the needs of all Americans in need. But that has never happened. Some churches do more than others. And there are Christian organizations as well.

Christian programs constantly appeal for funds. If their appeals are genuine, and I assume that they are, then tax-payer support and or wages are too low to meet the needs.





No comments:

Post a Comment