Monthly Archives: September 2008

Below I have posted a link to ABC news. If you do not have time to read the article you should watch the video.

The link, I believe, relates to what we talk about in class – the difference between the social democratic model of welfare (Keynes) and the liberal/conservative model (Friedman). I believe the main reason why people in Denmark are happy or contend is because they have a secured future. The government takes care of them from cradle till grave.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=4086092&page=1

I found an interesting article in NY times about the number of people on welfare is declining even though we are in a recession.

Just a thought I would like to share with the class about something I noticed over the years. Now, I used to live by the projects in Coney Island, Brooklyn (not actually in the projects but close enough) for many years. Every time I used to go somewhere I always used to drive by the projects, and the thing that always caught my eye were the ridicously expensive cars that were always parked on the streets. Now i dont want to be judgmental but if i remember correctly governemnt subsidized housing such as the ones that are spread out around coney island are supposed to be there for people who need help affording living arrangments. And presumably i would estimate that 50% of the residents recieve some sort of governemnt help such as section 8 or even workfare for that matter. So how can these so called “welfare recipients” afford such luxuries. I literally at any point during the day see hundred thousand dollar Mercedes or expensive BMW, Infiniti’s….. etc. I cant begin to fathom where they get the money to afford these cars. Are they working off the books and recieving welfare illegally? I dont know. Maybe the governemnt should be more careful to whom they give away money too and make sure its going to the right place. Im not saying everyone in the projects drive expensive cars and im plenty sure that most dont. But the ones that do have the fancy “whips” are doing what……….to get these cars.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/nyregion/26fraud.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin

I found this earlier today.  It just goes against alot of the stereotypes in the books and articales we’ve read in class. 

Welfare cheating has become a business for some people. People who would be making more than enough are stealing from the government, because they work for cash busniess it’s pretty unfair. 

Welfare cheats, come in all different colors and walks of life.

As promised….. Erik.

Now to be fair – he didn’t actually dress like this. We ended up at Jurgen’s family compound one night because it was too late to go back to town (Storuman) and when we got there it was FREEZING so we all found whatever clothes we could to put on to sleep in. Erik found a fur coat….

Senator John Labruzzo (R) member of the Louisiana State House believes that generational welfare is a major problem in Louisiana.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsRgp6qSKL4[/youtube]

Here are two other news clips on the same topic with some more detailed information:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D9DvlIXT7o[/youtube]

and

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0z3zsLdL7o[/youtube]

Absent from these videos is the following discussion: Payment for the reversal of the tubes, and/or IVF (aka invitro – if normal intercourse is not an option due to tubal failure) – if the female choosesto have a child anytime after the process. According to Webmd.com, “The price [for tubal ligation reversal] is somewhere around $7,000-$10,000.” [http://www.webmd.com/infertility-and-reproduction/is-tubal-ligation-reversable] Socialfertility.com states that, “The cost of an IVF cycle has been remarkably stable over the past 10 years. In any reputable program across the country, a cycle of IVF costs about $10,000-$12,000 including medication.” [www.socalfertility.com/ivf–cost-information.html]

According to yourcontraception.com, “The cost of tubal ligation usually ranges from $1,200 to $6,000. It depends very much upon the state, region and private clinic.” [http://www.yourcontraception.com/birth-control-methods/tubal-ligation/tubal-ligation.html] At minimum, it should cost the government no less then aprx $30,000 per person in upfront fees should the individual need to exhaust all the means of having a child after accepting the original tubal ligation.

If the person chooses tubal ligation, then has it reversed and successfully has a child – all at the cost of the State – Will the state then offer an incentive to have the tubes tied a second time and will it pay to have them untied a second time? This question can go on forever. My view being – if the state were to offer such an incentive program to help cut its own costs, is it willing to subject itself to future costs associated with serving an end, it in itself aided in making impossible – having a child. Children build families, families build communities, communities build cities and cities build nations…if the State is to keep with the traditional model of human nature – it would have a social responsibility to incur those costs as a “welfare” to its citizens.

In conclusion, I feel this idea may seem economically pleasing and implementation may seem feasible but if the State were to take up this program and walk in the footsteps of tradition – then such a program requires to many unknown variables financially – predominantly – Will this person decide to have a child once her tubes are tied, how many times will she try to get pregnant, do we WANT her to have her tube tied again and at what cost?– These are costs that cannot be projected or approximated at any one point in time and are not budget compatible – instead, this type of program lends itself to what I like to call,” the rolling stone budget bug” – or those type of programs requiring funding with unrealistic projected figures, any approximation is viewed in too narrow of a time frame and will only present a budget crisis later on. The curse of economic relativity!

In end, if their arguement for Tubal Ligation is strictly economic, then it immediately fails my test.

One problem does not fix another. It simply costs more money later.

the last two readings that we read and touched on wednesday talked about some big issues in welfare possibly the biggest issue which is the children on and affected by welfare.  when i read through these readings it made me realize how much these children do get affected and that children are a really big part of why people get on welfare.  i feel that if someone is going to have a child that isn’t a spur of the moment decision, it’s a decision that should be planned for well in advance because of the money needed to support a child.  the idea of having a child is to give that child more than you had so they could have a better life. this includes things such as a better education which would give your child a better position to get a better job in the long run.  i understand that if you get pregnant by accident then there is really nothing you can do there unless you didn’t practice safe sex then you weren’t acting responsibly and should have to live with the outcome.  but a point that was brought up in class that i never even thought of was that maybe these women were never taught how to practice safe sex or what products are out there for them to use.  in that case you can’t blame them really because no one ever sat down with them and told them the facts.  then these children are born to women who are often young and don’t have the ability to provide that child with everything that it’s going to need.  so now this child is going to have a disadvantage meaning that down the road they are going to have a tough time paying for school and eventually college.  this child isn’t going to be in any kind of good position because the child will only have what they family can afford which probably won’t be much unless the mother is able to get a good job down the road.  you should bring a child into the world when you are able to give it everything that it’s going to need including a good education.  but a lot of the time people don’t think of the outcomes of their actions and then when something that they didn’t expect to happen happens then don’t know where to go and they need help or else they won’t survive.

This is an interesting article regarding the “Family Caps” that we spoke about in class. The article has a more conservative lean, which I thought might be appealing.  <http://www.i2i.org/main/article.php?article_id=439>

My favorite part of the article is when the author points out that when a working family has more children, their employer doesn’t go and give them a raise—similarly, why would welfare recipients expect increased benefits when they have more children? It just doesn’t make sense.

Some highlighted points in the article:

“A system that tells a mother with two small children on welfare, “Go ahead, have more children, and we’ll give you more money,” is not doing the right thing for the mother or for her small children.”

“The more important effect of the cap was its moral message: The government will not subsidize irresponsible behavior. Of course, everyone…is still free to have as many children as they want, but not with a public cash bonus for having children at the wrong time in one’s life.”

“Under the family cap, a person who is already on welfare, and who then has additional children, does not get extra cash for having the additional children. The new children are still fully eligible for Medicaid and the family gets additional food stamps for them. The adults, however, do not receive extra cash.”

The article also has some statics which prove that unwanted pregnancy has decreased in states that have enacted the Family Caps program.

For those of you who haven’t seen this video, look at it when you have sometime. Its a nice comparison between the welfare systems of America and some countries in Europe. Its sad to see how crappy our health care system is, compared to Britain, Canada and France.

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=6GLO6VSV

So in “Let them eat Ketchup” I thought it was interesting how she refered to those women on welfare as”welfare Queens” because these women are never going to get off the system- insteasd of using this system as a stepping stone they just make it their lives. Another interseting point that the author made was that most people that are on welfare are whites – not Blacks or Hispanics