Would it help the welfare system if people who were once on welfare and are now fully employed have to repay some of what they used?  Just the same as child support does..state issued wage withholding order?  Why it is that just men have to repay the welfare through child support?  Why is it that those who have worked have to pay for the welfare benefits of others?  If a single mother becomes pregnant and knew she didn't have a job or any insurance, shouldn't she be made to seek employment and help repay the welfare that she needed?
208300
I think it would definitely help if people repaid the welfare system once they could afford to(voluntarily), what people should remember is that they're not paying it back to help the government, they're paying it back to help those in need who are now in a situation that they were once in themselves. I think that it's appalling that only men have to pay back welfare, in Australia it's a little more even.
611723
agree with you. It's something I think about quite a lot. Where I come from to work is kind of a privledge and a pain in the ass at the same time, but taxes do take a sizeable chunk out of anyone's income. People on a benefit admittedly do not receive a large income, but it's a pain in the ass when they say that they should be on one because "boo hoo" they are a single parent or whatever. And when the people who are working and basically, apart from all the rest of it, paying for them through their taxes, quite possibly have things which they could choose to say "boo hoo" about also. Anyway - that is just regarding your basic everyday run of the mill single parent family, which honestly probably does need quite a lot of help. If someone is together with someone else and passing themselves off as single so they can claim more benefits, then that is shitty yes. If they have plenty of money coming from someone else I don't think they should be chasing welfare stamps as a lifestyle option.
214738
Child support is not owed to the state. The state collects it forcibly if the parent will not pay willingly, but some states just collect if forcibly because they are nasty.  If you give your kids up for adoption, you owe nothing, and have nothing. A parent who gives up their kids must pay a great deal more than money. They will be paying a bit of themselves for the rest of their life.
551315
The Inland Revenue did this to me too when i reapplied for my tax credits in April of this year. They said i had earned £2,500 more than i had declared, and through this i owed them the money and they have stopped my credits until April of next year. I too am a single parent, they tell us to go back to work and we will benefit but we dont at all. What we earn we end up paying back out. I used to get help with my rent when i first went back to work too,  now that has stopped and im to pay out the full amount of rent which is £98.00pwk. Personally i would be better off on the social, although i dont want to be part of the people that take money off the state to live on and receive handouts. I  wanted to do right by my family and earn my way through life. Good luck hun hope all goes well for you but its a crap system dont you think. xx
240735
it's true what you are saying about people taking advantage...but not everybody ...some people are really poor and need the help..laws just have to catch those that take advantage of welfare ..because not everybody should pay....the laws need to tighten up on those individuals...that are taking advantage...but give welfare to the poor especially with really sick parent that cannot work,and need food for their children.
417567
Nice! \nDemocrats all the way baby!!!\n\nRe: Mei-Lin...You have no knowledge of assistance programs if you are going to make the claim that people that receive assistance simply are refusing to work. Taxes fund lots of programs such as social security and Medicare--do you want to take that assistance away from your grandparents? If not why then are so programs people deserving of and others they are not according to you? Are you aware that the large majority of people seeking welfare do not actually get it? In 1996 the nation had a major welfare reform. Welfare is no longer an entitlement program. If people seek welfare and they are able to work they typically receive no cash assistance. These programs are not easily accessable. So, that FAMILY may go without food or housing or heat until that parent can find a job. Is that ok with you? Do you want children going hungry? And, the majority of people receiving welfare are on it short-term, an average of 1-3 years. Also, people receiving welfare overwhelmingly have major life problems. A large percentage of recepients have a history of domestic violence, learning disabilities, mental illnesses...and the list goes on. Thus, these are not parents refusing to work these are parents with significant barriers to healthy life functioning, which includes maintaining employment. There will always be people that need help in any society and if those people do not recieve adequate help it will negatively effect the society. \nSecondly, in your republican mantra you stated that people should get their money back because they work hard. Question...city services among many other things need to be funded do you understand that that requires taxing people? It always seems that conservatives fail to see that taxing is necessary to provide citizens adequate services. You get something in return for the money you pay.
569459
People I've met that stay on welfare end up in a better financial situation then working full-time for minimum wage. Plus if you have children who need daycare, you end up working to pay the babysitter. It's a shame b/c continuing their education would get them a better job but either they don't think of it that way or they're lazy and don't want to try. This country definitely needs welfare reform AND disability reform. I've seen too many people take advantage of the system!
458914
considering the number of the population on welfare i would say no such agency exist. let me ask you, if you are hiring entry level laborers and of course paying them entry level pay, possibly minimum wage.....how does that get them off of welfare? minimum wage isnt enough to support a family without government assistant. you must have one hell of a corporation and i do applaud you taking the intuitive to make a difference in the life of some families. kudos to you.
235689
SS helps cover different situations.  Disabilities, survivors, etc.  Depending on why you are on SS, your children may or may not be able to get money.  But any money the government paid them would not off set the child support.  You would still be obligated to pay that as well.\n\nYou can call SS to ask about them getting money, but you will still have to pay child support.
360313
Well I can think of two types of men who might have a problem with the CSA. \n\nFirst of all, there's a huge culture of financial irresponsibility among these days. People who get really angry when made to take responsibility for themselves. And it's a bigger problem than just the CSA. I used to work at the housing association and you'd be surprised how many people in very reasonable subsidised housing in a very nice borough in London would b*tch and complain when they went into arrears and the council chased up their rent- as if it wasn't our right to ask them to pay their (massively cheap) rent?! And we all know people with huge debts who totally resent the fact that the bank is so cheeky as to want their 5 grand back.\n\nSo it's no surprise that a few people have the attitude that they shouldnt have to pay for their kids either. It's this attitude that they are above the law, the exception to the rule, although they can never back this up with any actual reason so they just get angry and lash out at the person coming to them to collect.\n\nI think there's another breed of men who oppose the CSA because as far as I understand, it isn't controlled by the same agency that controls custody and visitation arrangements. So while a man might be fighting in court to even be allowed to see his children, if his ex is denying him access, he probably resents the CSA chasing him up for all his money while this is going on. This makes a little more sense. In theory it seems fair that if a man is denied access once the courts have given it to him, he ought to be able to withold payments to his ex as a bargaining tool. Unfortunately this just can't be the way of things as long as it's the kids who will suffer in less well-off families.
338565
Social Services is a better word for welfare. Just state that it is a free income for those that can not find work and are not drawing unemployment. It is sponsored by the goverment. But, the working man pays for it. Some time it runs in families,like a virus. Social services give more to people than the working man can. there are many working men out there that don't have money in their pockets, can't send their children to the dentist. or get eye glasses as they need them. Welfare clients can get just about anything they want whether needed or not. These people should be made to get  out and rake leaves,shovel side walks,mow lawns, for senior citizens and disabled people. To earn aleast some of their income. If I dare say, most of them are lazy. I used to deliver mail, the box was not shoveled out, The check was in the mail for them and I thought to be nice I would try to pull up and deposit the check. Well, I got stuck in over a foot of snow, While I was trying to get out, there were 4 adults watching out the window . Ugggggggggggh
590989
people on welfare need something to talk about and unlike people who work they cant talk or bitch about there job so they bitch about welfare or bills that working people are paying for anyway.I imagin that theses people will be givin you all kinds of answers about this and all I ask is how the hell they got a computer.
412245
There are two sides to this argument, however I believe a shared cost of the childs needs should be paid for, not a percentage of someones disposable income.\n\nIf we take as average 25% of income at a take home wage of say £300 per week, this is £75 per week. With the best will in the world it does not cost £75 per week to feed and clothe a child.\n\nI do not believe that the parent with custody should be paid for looking after the child.\n\nMy hubby has a daughter and the CSA tried it with him. He blew them out of the water. He told them he would prefer to hire a professional than pay his ex to look after his daughter.\n\nHe is lucky, he has a law degree so he knew how to fight them.
42260
It depends on why the children are poor, sick and hungry.  If its because you are spending all your income on drugs and not attending to your support obligations, then it is child neglect (not necessarily abuse).\nHowever, if your children are poor, sick, and hungry and you have done everything you could to support them, then you may just be unfortunate and in need of a helping hand, or you may be incompetent, and in need of a caretaker yourself.
510582
If they're stable and able to support a child and provide a good environment, why not?  How could living with two people who love each other and want to love a child be worse than being farmed out to a foster family just looking for the monthly check?
63040
The problem with the system is that it's difficult and highly impractical to track each welfare recipient down to see whether they're trying to better themself or not. \n\nSome people deserve and need welfare, many do not...\n\nI should mention that I received WIC and Medical Assistance for my son while I finished college. Now I have my degree, I no longer need it, and I am financially stable on my own.  I am thankful that the program was in place to help me when I desperately needed it.
557420
I agree with you on the position that staying home parent and taking care of the kids is a full time job.  But unfortunately since you are not earning income you are not considered working by the laws.  Why loan companies do not accept you only based on your income? Because you don't have any.  This is how they are looking at it- if they give you the money and you don't pay them (either loan for a mortgage or car or personal loan) how can they get money back from you?  From where?  If you earn money they can get a garnishment of your income.  And keep in mind that they are not in the business of repo-ing cars or taking away your house.  Don't get me wrong-they'll do it if they have no other choice but they would prefer to have another outlet of collecting their money.